Litigation - Intellectual Property Litigation - Patent
J. Austin Curry
Recognized in Best Lawyers since 2017 Awarded Practice Areas
Biography
John Austin Curry is a principal at Caldwell Cassady & Curry. He primarily focuses his practice on patent infringement disputes. He has worked on high-technology cases involving electrical engineering and computer science technologies. Specifically, Mr. Curry has litigated and tried cases involving technology related to the manipulation of document architecture, systems and logic designed to facilitate the creation of secure communications, algorithms for efficient usage of routing cache, and techniques for down-converting carrier RF signals to baseband.
Mr. Curry has experience in all aspects of patent litigation, from pre-suit investigation to developing case strategy, securing evidence for claims, working with expert witnesses, taking adverse depositions of key witnesses (both fact and expert), and trials and appeals.
Prior to founding Caldwell Cassady & Curry, Mr. Curry worked at McKool Smith. Before that, he worked in industry at a semiconductor manufacturer where he developed a software application for secure near-range consumer transactions to demonstrate the potential of a reduced instruction set chipset.
Curry graduated from the University of Virginia School of Law after graduating valedictorian in his engineering and mathematics class at SMU. He now serves as a member of SMU’s Lyle School of Engineering Executive Board.
REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS:
Smartflash Litigation
VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc.
Dr. Robert Morley v. Square Inc.
VirnetX Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.
Bedrock Computer Techs. v. Google Inc.
i4i Limited Partnership v. Microsoft Corp.
Overview
- University of Virginia, J.D., graduated 2007
- Southern Methodist University, BS, graduated 2004
- New York, New York State Bar Association
- Texas, State Bar of Texas
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
- New York, New York State Bar Association
- Texas, State Bar of Texas
- University of Virginia, J.D., graduated 2007
- Southern Methodist University, BS, graduated 2004
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Client Testimonials
Awards & Focus
Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2026 for work in:
- Litigation - Intellectual Property
- Litigation - Patent
Additional Areas of Practice:
- Commercial Litigation
- Copyright Law
- Communications Law
- Bet-the-Company Litigation
- Technology Law
- Appellate Practice
- Litigation - Antitrust
Awards:
- Best Lawyers in America
Texas Super Lawyers
- Texas Rising Stars
- Best Lawyers in Dallas, D Magazine
Benchmark Litigation Stars
Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America
News & Media
Case History
Cases
- SAS Institute Inc. v. World Programming Limited, et al.
Mr. Curry helped Caldwell Cassady & Curry successfully defend World Programming Limited, YUM! Brands, Inc., Luminex Software, Inc., Pizza Hut, Inc., and Shaw Industries Group, Inc., in a high-profile copyright and patent case filed by SAS Institute in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuit alleged that World Programming’s analytics software infringes intellectual property owned by SAS Institute. This was the latest in a decade-long string of lawsuits that SAS Institute has brought against its direct competitor, World Programming. In Fall 2020, the firm obtained a complete defense victory. On the eve of trial, the district court sided with World Programming and dismissed SAS Institute’s case with prejudice. Firm attorneys continue to represent World Programming in SAS Institute’s appeal to the Federal Circuit.
- Constellation Designs v. LG Electronics
Mr. Curry was a member of the Caldwell Cassady & Curry trial team that won a $1.7 million patent infringement verdict in July 2023 for Constellation Designs against LG Electronics Inc. The jury in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas affirmed Constellation Designs’ patented technology covering crucial elements for the emerging ATSC 3.0 (NextGen TV) standard for television broadcasts. The award was based on $6.72 per unit for each infringing LG Electronics product the company had sold.
- VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc.
Mr. Curry is a member of the Caldwell Cassady & Curry team representing VirnetX in the company’s patent infringement litigation against technology giant Apple Inc.
In a dispute that the Eastern District of Texas trial court said has attained Dickensian proportions, Caldwell Cassady & Curry has helped VirnetX win favorable verdicts in five separate trials where each jury awarded over $300 million in damages.
In late 2012, Mr. Curry helped VirnetX win a $368 million verdict when a federal jury determined that Apple had infringed four VirnetX patents to produce the VPN On Demand and FaceTime features in the popular iPhone and other Apple products.
After the case was sent back for a new trial on damages, we won again by securing a $625 million verdict for VirnetX in February 2016 after jurors in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas found that Apple continued to infringe VirnetX’s patents following the first trial to produce the FaceTime and re-designed VPN On Demand features. The jury also found that Apple’s infringement was willful regarding FaceTime and VPN on Demand.
The court later vacated its order to consolidate the matters and set the cases for two separate jury trials focusing on different versions of Apple features.
In the first new trial heard in September 2016 pertaining to the earlier generations of products, we helped VirnetX win a $302 million verdict against Apple before a new Eastern District jury. The verdict was entered as a $439.7 million judgment in September 2017 and affirmed on appeal by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In the second new trial heard in April 2018 addressing the newer generations of products, a different Eastern District jury awarded a unanimous verdict of $502.6 million in favor of VirnetX after finding Apple’s infringement was willful. After that verdict was sent back for a new trial on damages, a final trial was held in Fall 2020, again in the Eastern District of Texas. In that trial, the firm secured a $502.8 million jury verdict following the Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the 2018 finding that Apple’s VPN On Demand in iOS versions 7.0 and later infringed VirnetX’s patents. The district court later denied Apple’s request for a new trial and entered the jury’s verdict in favor of VirnetX as a final judgment.
In a dispute that the Eastern District of Texas trial court said has attained Dickensian proportions, Caldwell Cassady & Curry has helped VirnetX win favorable verdicts in five separate trials where each jury awarded over $300 million in damages.
In late 2012, Mr. Curry helped VirnetX win a $368 million verdict when a federal jury determined that Apple had infringed four VirnetX patents to produce the VPN On Demand and FaceTime features in the popular iPhone and other Apple products.
After the case was sent back for a new trial on damages, we won again by securing a $625 million verdict for VirnetX in February 2016 after jurors in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas found that Apple continued to infringe VirnetX’s patents following the first trial to produce the FaceTime and re-designed VPN On Demand features. The jury also found that Apple’s infringement was willful regarding FaceTime and VPN on Demand.
The court later vacated its order to consolidate the matters and set the cases for two separate jury trials focusing on different versions of Apple features.
In the first new trial heard in September 2016 pertaining to the earlier generations of products, we helped VirnetX win a $302 million verdict against Apple before a new Eastern District jury. The verdict was entered as a $439.7 million judgment in September 2017 and affirmed on appeal by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In the second new trial heard in April 2018 addressing the newer generations of products, a different Eastern District jury awarded a unanimous verdict of $502.6 million in favor of VirnetX after finding Apple’s infringement was willful. After that verdict was sent back for a new trial on damages, a final trial was held in Fall 2020, again in the Eastern District of Texas. In that trial, the firm secured a $502.8 million jury verdict following the Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the 2018 finding that Apple’s VPN On Demand in iOS versions 7.0 and later infringed VirnetX’s patents. The district court later denied Apple’s request for a new trial and entered the jury’s verdict in favor of VirnetX as a final judgment.
Your browser is not fully compatible with our automatic printer friendly formatting.
Please use the print button to print this profile page.