Amit Makker represents clients in complex intellectual property disputes across a range of high technology sectors.

Mr. Makker guides clients through the full life cycle of patent disputes in a broad range of technical industries, including:

  • Networking technologies, both wired and wireless
  • Cellular systems
  • Internet and cloud technologies
  • Semiconductors
  • Computer hardware
  • Medical devices
  • Automotive

Mr. Makker has experience in all phases of patent litigation, including claim construction proceedings, summary judgment proceedings, and trial. His background as an electrical engineer for a large defense contractor and his broad technical knowledge allow him to communicate effectively with engineers and distill complex concepts for judges and juries.

He represents clients in district courts, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and in post-grant proceedings including inter partes review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

While in law school, Mr. Makker was a senior copy editor for the Southern California Law Review and Co-Chair of the Intellectual Property and Technology Society. He also served as a judicial extern for Judge Christina A. Snyder of the District Court for the Central District of California.

As part of his active pro bono practice, Mr. Makker was part of the Latham team that led the 2020 US Census litigation (for which the team won the firm’s Robert M. Dell Prize for Extraordinary Pro Bono Service), successfully petitioned the Obama administration for clemency on a client’s behalf, and successfully sought expungement of a client’s criminal record.

Mr. Makker’s experience includes:

District Court

  • WSOU Investments, LLC v. Arista Networks, Inc. (N.D. Cal.), in representing Arista Networks in its ongoing dispute with WSOU Investments relating to networking patents from an Alcatel-Lucent portfolio that WSOU obtained, which was successfully transferred from W.D. Tex. to N.D. Cal.
  • Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation et al. v. Texas Instruments Inc. (W.D. Tex.), in representing Texas Instruments in its dispute with Nippon Telephone and Telegraph (NTT) and Essential Wi-Fi regarding NTT’s allegedly standard-essential patents to various 802.11 Wi-Fi standards, which resolved favorably for Texas Instruments
  • Invensas Corp. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (E.D. Tex.), in representing Invensas parent company Xperi in asserting patents regarding various semiconductor technologies against Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas and the District of Delaware as part of a larger a patent infringement dispute involving 23 patents in seven US lawsuits, all of which were successfully settled, with Xperi generating a substantial growth of more than 40% in share value shortly after the settlement’s announcement
  • Samsung Electronics v. NVIDIA (E.D. Va.), defending NVIDIA in an eight-patent suit involving various semiconductor technologies, including fabrication, memory controllers, and SDRAMs, in which only three patents remained at trial, where the judge declared a mistrial as to two patents and the jury found the remaining patent not infringed
  • Realtime Data v. Veritas Technologies (N.D. Cal.), in representing defendant Veritas in a patent litigation asserting five patents relating to data compression technology, in which the team successfully obtained a stay pending IPRs prior to institution of IPRs on two of the five asserted patents obtained transfer from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California


  • In re Certain Smart Thermostats, Smart HVAC Systems, and Components Thereof, in representing Daikin Industries in its dispute with EcoFactor regarding EcoFactor’s patents related to smart thermostats and HVAC systems, which involved an ITC investigation and two district court cases and concluded with a favorable resolution for Daikin
  • In re Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same, in representing respondent NVIDIA in patent litigation asserting four patents relating to computer graphics technology, in which the team developed robust invalidity and non-infringement positions in support of an early negotiated settlement


  • Synaptive Medical Inc. v. Karl Storz Endoscopy-Am., Inc., in representing Synaptive Medical, an emerging Toronto-based medical device company, in a litigation battle against competitor Karl Storz relating to robotic digital microscopy, including a US District Court litigation and a PTAB proceeding, in which the team successfully stayed the District Court litigation and obtained a favorable ruling in the PTAB proceeding

Bar Qualification

  • California
  • US Patent and Trademark Office


  • JD, University of Southern California Law School, 2011
  • MS in Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, 2008
  • BS in Electrical Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, 2004