Dale Chang represents clients in high-stakes patent litigation, with a particular focus on trial work.
Mr. Chang litigates patent disputes on leading-edge technologies in a wide range of fields, including:
He has successfully litigated cases in every major patent venue across the US, including district courts, the International Trade Commission, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, both as plaintiff and defense counsel.
Drawing on his background as an electrical engineer — including prior industry experience at two global tech companies— Mr. Chang has the rare ability to distill complex technologies into engaging stories that resonate with judges and juries. His competitive spirit as a former hockey player drives him to take on tough cases likely to go to trial.
He thrives in high-pressure trial settings where he is known for quickly honing in on weaknesses in the opponent’s case and devising creative strategies for attacking them.
Most recently, Mr. Chang first-chaired a PTAB trial in an inter partes review of a patent on which the patentee had prevailed at the International Trade Commission (ITC). In January 2022, the PTAB issued its final decision, finding all claims of the patent invalid. A week before that decision, Mr. Chang obtained another complete victory from the PTAB, in a post grant review of a patent asserted in district court.
Mr. Chang was also instrumental in securing LG Chem’s 2020 default judgment win at the ITC in its high profile trade secrets case against SK Innovation regarding electric car batteries.
Other notable achievements include 2018, 2016, and 2014 jury wins in district court, and major victories at the ITC in 2020, 2017, and 2015.
Mr. Chang’s representative matters also include:
First Quality Tissue v. Irving Consumer Products, as counsel to Irving Consumer Products defending against alleged patent infringement relating to dried tissue
WiTricity v. Momentum Dynamics, as counsel to Momentum Dynamics in defending a seven-patent case on wireless charging technology for electronic vehicles
Counsel for AMD in its patent cross-license dispute with Intel, in which Intel agreed to pay US$1.25 billion to AMD to settle all disputes between the parties
EON Corp. IP Holdings v. Skytel, as counsel for defendant USA Mobility in a patent infringement case involving two-way paging technology
InterDigital v. ZTE (D. Del.), as counsel for InterDigital in asserting three patents relating to 3G and Wi Fi technologies, in which the jury found all asserted claims infringed and valid (damages bifurcated)
Kruse Technology Partnership v. Isuzu Motors and Kruse Technology Partnership v. Ford Motor Company, as counsel for various Isuzu entities and Ford in defending against alleged patent infringement relating to internal combustion engines
Positive Technologies v. BenQ America, as counsel for defendant Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America in a patent infringement case involving LCD display technology
Prism Technologies v. Adobe Systems, as counsel for Symantec in defending against alleged patent infringement relating to two-factor authentication, obtaining summary judgment for non-infringement after most defendants settled
Samsung v. NVIDIA (E.D. Va.), as counsel for NVIDIA in defending against eight patents relating to semiconductor and other technologies, in which Samsung dropped all but three patents prior to trial and the Latham team moved for Rule 37 sanctions as to two of the three remaining patents, resulting a mistrial on those two patents and a jury win on the sole remaining patent, finding all asserted claims not infringed, one asserted claim invalid, and damages of “US$0”
Symantec v. Computer Associates Int'l, as counsel for plaintiff Symantec in a patent infringement case involving anti-virus technology
Technology Patents v. Deutsche Telekom, as counsel for defendants Telecom Italia and Telecom Personal in a patent infringement case involving SMS technology
Uniloc v. Symantec, as counsel for defendant Symantec in a patent infringement case involving software registration technology
International Trade Commission
InterDigital v. Microsoft & Nokia, as counsel for InterDigital in asserting two patents relating to 3G cellphone technology, in which an initial determination finding violation was issued in April 2015
Monolithic Power Systems v. O2 Micro International and In the Matter of Certain Cold Cathode Flourescent Lamp (CCFL) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing Same, as counsel for Monolithic Power Systems in a declaratory judgment action and a related ITC investigation involving patents involving LCD backlighting control circuits, in which the team obtained dismissal with prejudice on the eve of trial in the declaratory judgment action following a report of the court-appointed independent expert’s finding the asserted claims invalid and not infringed, resulting in a final determination of non-infringement in the ITC investigation
RJ Reynolds v. Philip Morris & Altria, as counsel to Philip Morris International and Altria in a multijurisdictional patent dispute against British American Tobacco and subsidiary RJ Reynolds relating to electronic “heat-not-burn” and vaping technologies
BSEE in Electrical Engineering, University of Illinois
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.