Adam M. Greenfield

Washington, D.C.
  • 555 Eleventh Street, NW
  • Suite 1000
  • Washington, D.C. 20004-1304
  • USA
 
 

Adam Greenfield advises clients from across industries on complex patent matters, with a particular focus on litigation and licensing issues involving electrical and computer technology.

Drawing on his sophisticated technical knowledge and trial experience, Mr. Greenfield represents domestic and international clients in disputes before key patent venues, including district courts across the United States, the US International Trade Commission (ITC), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. His diverse client base encompasses many of the world’s top brands, ranging from global financial institutions to leading companies within the automotive, manufacturing, computer networking, and consumer electronics sectors.

Mr. Greenfield regularly handles multifaceted patent matters complicated by antitrust, false advertising, trade secret, or other issues. Mr. Greenfield’s representations also frequently involve standard essential patents and fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory licensing.

Mr. Greenfield offers clients an in-depth knowledge of the patent space, combining a background in electrical engineering and prior experience clerking for Judge Kimberly A. Moore at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He helps clients achieve resolutions efficiently and effectively by conducting early case analysis — mindful of avoiding unnecessarily prolonged litigation when possible.

Mr. Greenfield is a frequent speaker and writer on patent issues. He is also a member of the Legal Professional & Paralegal Committee.

Accolades

Mr. Greenfield has earned broad industry recognition for his practice work. His honors include:

  • Recommended by The Legal 500 US, 2018
  • Named a Federal Circuit Bar Association Global Fellow, 2017-2018
  • Named a Rising Star in Washington, D.C. by Super Lawyers, 2014-2017

Mr. Greenfield’s representative matters include the following:

  • In the Matter of Certain Thermoplastic-Encapsulated Electric Motors, Components Thereof, and Products and Vehicles Containing Same II (ITC): Representing Honda in multi-patent case refiled by Intellectual Ventures after the ALJ terminated the original investigation for lack of standing. Trial resulted in initial determination and Commission decision of no violation.
  • Pacific Coast Bldg. Prods., Inc. v. CertainTeed Gypsum, Inc., et al. (Fed. Cir.; N.D. Cal.; W.D. Ark.): Representing CertainTeed in patent cases relating to gypsum and viscoelastic glue products. Invalidated one patent based on indefiniteness and obtained covenant-not-to-sue and stipulated dismissal with prejudice for second patent. Pacific Coast has appealed, forming basis for stay of related two-patent case.
  • Intellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. Capital One Financial Corp., et al. (Fed. Cir.; D. Md.): Represented Capital One in multi-patent and antitrust case relating to data security and electronic banking. Obtained early dismissal of one patent and summary judgment that remaining four patents are invalid, which was affirmed on appeal.
  • Vehicle Interface Technologies, LLC v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (Fed. Cir.): Represented Jaguar Land Rover in patent appeal relating to vehicle dashboard technology. Summary judgment of invalidity based on anticipation affirmed.
  • In the Matter of Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same (USITC): Represented NVIDIA in multi-patent case relating to graphics processing technology. Settled.
  • Federal-Mogul Motorparts Corp. v. Mevotech L.P. (E.D. Mich.; USITC): Represented Mevotech in patent and false advertising cases relating to automotive aftermarket parts. Settled.
  • Graff/Ross Holdings, LLP v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. (Fed. Cir.; D.D.C.): Represented Freddie Mac in one defensive and two declaratory judgment patent cases relating to electronic bond auctions. Summary judgment invalidating all 616 asserted patent claims affirmed.
  • Intellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. HSBC USA Inc., et al. (S.D.N.Y.): Represented HSBC in multi-patent case relating to financial services. All claims voluntarily dismissed with prejudice.
  • SSL Services, LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc., et al. (Fed. Cir.): Represented SSL in patent appeal relating to VPN technology. Judgment of willful infringement and no invalidity affirmed.
  • Technology Patents LLC v. T-Mobile (UK) Ltd., et al. (Fed. Cir.): Represented KPN, Base and E-Plus Mobilfunk in appeal of successful dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction. Affirmed.
 
 
 
Notice: We appreciate your interest in Latham & Watkins. If your inquiry relates to a legal matter and you are not already a current client of the firm, please do not transmit any confidential information to us. Before taking on a representation, we must determine whether we are in a position to assist you and agree on the terms and conditions of engagement with you. Until we have completed such steps, we will not be deemed to have a lawyer-client relationship with you, and will have no duty to keep confidential the information we receive from you. Thank you for your understanding.