Cecilia Peniza represents clients across all phases of patent litigation and arbitration proceedings in a wide range of technologies, including medical devices, automotive parts, industrial machinery, mobile applications, and computer and other handheld electronics, and consumer goods. Ms. Peniza brings experience in jury trials in US District Courts as well as hearings before the US International Trade Commission, examining fact and expert witnesses and arguing numerous issues in court ranging from preliminary injunction and evidentiary motions, to claim construction and post-trial issues.

Ms. Peniza’s practice also includes counseling clients on IP issues in pre-product launch or business acquisitions, as well as advising clients on licensing issues.

Prior to joining Latham, Ms. Peniza served as a presenter at various legal workshops on licensing, a co-editor on a weekly publication on IP licensing issues at the Licensing Executive Society, and as an adjunct professor teaching licensing at George Washington University Law School.

Ms. Peniza leverages her engineering background to help clients navigate:

  • Pre-trial, discovery, trial, and post-trial phases of complex patent litigation in federal court
  • International Trade Commission (ITC) hearings
  • Patent prosecution and US Patent and Trademark Office proceedings, including inter partes reviews
  • Licensing and settlement agreements

Ms. Peniza maintains an active pro bono practice, which includes advising in landlord-tenant, Social Security disability, and criminal matters, often Spanish-speaking clients’ behalf.

Ms. Peniza’s experience includes representing:

Patent Litigation

  • AbbVie, as co-counsel with Latham, in a major biosimilar matter on which she advised on the device patent at issue in the litigation*
  • Hyundai and Kia in defending against patent infringement allegations regarding Bluelink, UVO, and airbag systems in Texas and Michigan federal court*
  • Alfa Laval in successfully enforcing patents relating to conical-disc separators in Illinois federal court*
  • Philips in asserting MPEG technology patents against Hewlett-Packard’s media player and computer products in Virginia federal court*
  • Defendants in a patent infringement action involving lab grown diamonds in New York federal court*
  • A Korean polyimide film manufacturer in a patent infringement and unfair competition action in California federal court*
  • A Korean consumer appliance manufacturer on a patent infringement action involving refrigeration technology in Delaware federal court*

ITC Proceedings

  • One of the largest computer and tablet manufacturers in an ITC investigation and related district court actions regarding operating system and touch screen features* 
  • A large Korean electronics company in an ITC investigation involving multi-standard video decoding*
  • Various respondents in an ITC investigation involving two-way radios and related audio features, including obtaining a favorable decision on new designs*
  • Chinese respondents an ITC investigation involving drone technology*
  • Chinese respondent Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Design in two ITC cases — one brought by Razor and the other brought by Segway — which included achieving administrative law judge findings of no infringement and no domestic industry after trial in each case and subsequent ITC affirmations*

*Matters handled prior to joining Latham

Bar Qualification

  • District of Columbia
  • Virginia


  • JD, Georgetown University Law Center, 2009
    cum laude
  • BS, University of Florida, 2005
    cum laude
Achievement Tile Image
November 22, 2022 Article

How Litigation Funding Disclosure Rules Affect NPE Filings

Bay Area partner Rick Frenkel and Washington, D.C. partner Cecilia Sanabria discuss why litigation by non-practicing entities has increased in the last five years and whether litigation disclosure requirements affect choice of venue, in an article for Bloomberg Law.