Nathan Hamstra
Partner
Quick Actions
Offices
}
Nathan Hamstra
nathanhamstra@quinnemanuel.comNathan Hamstra is a partner in the Chicago office of Quinn Emanuel. He has been with the firm since 2010. He focuses on intellectual property litigation representing both plaintiffs and defendants, with a particular concentration on patent litigation relating to computer software and hardware. He has litigated in a number of different federal courts as well as in front of the ITC. He holds a B.S., with honors, in computer engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Before attending University of Michigan Law School, he worked as a programmer developing e-commerce systems.
Practice Areas
Notable Representations
- Represented Nokia against Traxcell in patent litigation relating to cellular network optimization in the Eastern District of Texas. Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement on behalf of Nokia. Argued the subsequent appeal to the Federal Circuit, with the Federal Circuit affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment in a precedential opinion, 15 F.4th 1136.
- Obtained a complete jury verdict on behalf of Qualcomm against Apple in a patent litigation in the Southern District of California (Case No. 17-cv-1375). At trial, Qualcomm asserted three patents against Apple, including patents directed to inter-processor communications and graphics processing. The jury found that Apple infringed all three patents, rejected Apple’s validity defenses, and awarded Qualcomm all the damages it sought (a royalty of $1.41 per iPhone). Conducted directed and cross examinations at trial, including a direct examination of one of our infringement experts.
- Represented Qualcomm in several additional matters adverse to Apple, including in ITC investigation No. 337-TA-1065. Conducted several expert examinations during trial in that investigation.
- Represented Blue Coat against Finjan in patent litigation involving six computer security-related patents in the Northern District of California. Obtained a favorable jury verdict at trial, including of non-infringement on two asserted patents and a small damages award on two other asserted patents. Cross-examined Finjan’s infringement expert on one of the patents held not to be infringed.
- Representing Symantec against Columbia University in litigation in which Columbia asserts patent infringement and state law claims in the Eastern District of Virginia. Columbia University stipulated to judgment of non-infringement of all asserted patents after claim construction, the majority of which were affirmed by the Federal Circuit. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board additionally invalidated most claims of the only patent family remaining asserted.
- Represented Symantec against Finjan in patent litigation in the Northern District of California, in which Finjan asserts eight patents relating to computer security against Symantec.
- Represented Qualcomm against DSS Technology Management in patent litigation relating to semiconductor fabrication in the Eastern District of Texas. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has issued final written decisions invalidating all asserted claims, and we obtained a dismissal with prejudice.
- Representing Nokia and Alcatel-Lucent against the University of Minnesota in patent infringement case pending in the District of Minnesota, in which University of Minnesota asserts patents that purportedly read on the LTE standard.
- Represented AptarGroup in trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract action against Kraft Heinz in the Western District of Pennsylvania, in which AptarGroup alleged that Kraft Heinz misused Aptar’s confidential designs for Aptar’s dispensing closures. The parties settled on terms favorable to Aptar shortly before a preliminary injunction hearing.
- Represented defendant Samsung Electronics and third party Google in the second smartphone patent case brought by Apple in the Northern District of California. Representation focused on Apple patent related to alleged universal search, for which a jury verdict of non-infringement was obtained.
- Represented Fortinet as plaintiff in wide-ranging dispute with its competitor involving alleged misappropriation of trade secrets, patent infringement claims and other state law claims. The parties settled shortly before trial in the Northern District of California on Fortinet’s trade secret and patent infringement claims, with the competitor agreeing to make a confidential one-time payment to Fortinet.
- Represented Qualcomm in the Central District of California in a patent litigation involving semiconductor memory circuits. Obtained a dismissal with prejudice after the Court granted Qualcomm leave to file an early motion for summary judgment of invalidity.
- Represented Sony in a multi-jurisdictional dispute with LG relating to Sony's digital televisions, digital cameras, and blu-ray disc players. The dispute involved two lawsuits in San Diego federal district court as well as a consolidated investigation before the U.S. International Trade Commission. The case settled favorably.
- Represented Symantec in Eastern District of Texas patent litigation related to cryptographic protocols.
Representative Clients
Education
- University of Michigan Law School
(J.D., cum laude, 2005) - University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
(B.S., with honors, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Computer Engineering, 2001)
Admissions
- The State Bar of Illinois
- Registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office
Prior Associations
- Mayer Brown LLP:
- Associate, 2005-2010
Professional Activities
- Evans Scholars Foundation Leadership Council