Sami Al-Marzoog is an associate in the Washington, D.C. office of Latham & Watkins.

Mr. Al-Marzoog is an intellectual property litigator who focuses on patent litigation across key venues, including federal district court, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and the Federal Circuit. He represents clients across a diverse range of technologies, including semiconductors, chemicals, automotive, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and digital health.

Mr. Al-Marzoog has a wide-range of litigation experience, including pre-suit investigations, fact and expert discovery, summary judgment, and trial; and has successfully argued claim construction, Daubert, and other discovery motions in court.

In addition to his intellectual property practice, Mr. Al-Marzoog maintains an active pro bono practice representing clients seeking expungement of their criminal records.

While in law school, Mr. Al-Marzoog served on the managing board of the Virginia Law and Business Review. He was also the vice president of the Student Bar Association and a member of the Raven Society.

Prior to attending law school, Mr. Al-Marzoog worked for a large oil company in Saudi Arabia as an environmental coordinator and a drilling-fluids engineer.

Mr. Al-Marzoog graduated from the University of Minnesota – Twin Cities with a BS in Chemical Engineering and a minor in Chemistry.

Mr. Al-Marzoog's representation experience includes:

  • Magna Mirrors v. SMR (W.D. Mich.): Counsel in jury trial victory for SMR defending nine-patent case on automotive mirror technology. Won jury verdict invalidating all asserted patents and no induced infringement.
  • First Quality v. Irving (D.De.): Counsel in jury trial victory for Irving Consumer Products against First Quality in the US District Court for the District of Delaware. Retained one week before the close of fact discovery. First Quality alleged that Irving infringed on three patents relating to bath tissue. After a week-long trial, the jury returned a verdict for our client, Irving, finding that all three patents were not infringed and were invalid.
  • Philip Morris v. RJ Reynolds (E.D.V.A.): Counsel in jury trial victory for Philip Morris against RJ Reynolds in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Philip Morris accused Reynolds of infringing two patents covering innovative “heat-not-burn” technologies. After a four-day trial, the jury returned a multi-million dollar verdict for our client finding both patents were infringed and valid.

Bar Qualification

  • District of Columbia
  • Minnesota

Education

  • JD, University of Virginia School of Law, 2017
  • BS in Chemical Engineering & Chemistry, University of Minnesota, 2012

Languages Spoken

  • Arabic
  • English