Patexia Insight 236: Top Attorneys in Patent Litigation 2025
Behind every patent litigation case is a skilled attorney preparing strategy, mastering complex IP law, and advocating for their client’s interests. These individuals play a key role in defining the outcome of disputes that often involve millions of dollars and cutting-edge innovation.
As part of our annual Patent Litigation Intelligence Report, Patexia has analyzed the performance and activity of 14,954 attorneys involved in U.S. District Court patent litigation over the past five years. Drawing data from 17,985 cases and 17,342 unique patents, our data-driven rankings highlight the most active and best-performing attorneys—those who consistently deliver results for plaintiffs, defendants, and overall. Whether leading litigation for Fortune 500 companies or representing startups in high-stakes disputes, the attorneys featured in this insight have set themselves apart through volume, consistency, and success in outcomes.
Filing Activity: The Foundation for Activity Rankings
Our Patent Litigation Intelligence Report 2025 evaluates the overall activity of all entities, including attorneys, based on the volume of litigation in which they were involved during the five-year study period and the patents involved (July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2024). The chart below shows the annual number of patent litigation cases filed and the patents litigated each year. These metrics form the core of our activity rankings, reflecting the attorneys' involvement in patent disputes across industries. In addition to activity, our rankings also factor in performance, measured by outcomes of terminated cases. As outlined in our previous insight on top law firms, these outcomes help us evaluate how effectively attorneys represented their clients throughout the litigation process.
Patent litigation activity remained relatively consistent over the past six years, with annual case filings ranging from just over 3,100 to nearly 4,000. The peak occurred in 2021, with 3,953 cases and 5,188 unique patents, marking the most active year for both filings and patent involvement. Although filings dipped in 2023, they rebounded in 2024, suggesting a renewed momentum in litigation activity. The data reflects a continuous demand for patent protection and underscores the key role attorneys play in disputes across a wide range of technologies.
Top Ranked Attorneys
Over the five-year study period, a total of 14,954 unique attorneys participated in U.S. District Court patent litigation, either as lead or local counsel. Of these, 9,456 represented plaintiffs, while 10,282 defended clients—with many attorneys appearing on both sides in different cases. While the majority handled a small number of cases, a select group stood out for their consistent involvement and strategic impact. The table below highlights some of the most active and best-performing patent litigators based on our comprehensive evaluation of both activity and performance.
| Attorney | Law Firm | Ranked Category | Rank | All Cases |
| Brady Cox | Alston & Bird | Defendant Performance Rank | 1 | 63 |
| John M. Guaragna | DLA Piper | Overall Performance Rank | 2 | 143 |
| Brian C. Nash | Morrison & Foerster | Defendant Performance Rank | 3 | 76 |
| Reza Mirzaie | Russ August & Kabat | Plaintiff Activity Rank | 6 | 296 |
| Kelly Ransom | Kelly Hart & Hallman | Defendant Performance Rank | 7 | 60 |
| Steven D. Moore | Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton | Defendant Activity Rank | 9 | 77 |
| Jennifer Truelove | McKool Smith | Plaintiff Activity Rank | 15 | 129 |
| Michael J. Sacksteder | Fenwick & West LLP | Defendant Performance Rank | 20 | 55 |
| Andrew R. Sommer | Greenberg Traurig LLP | Defendant Activity Rank | 39 | 29 |
| Sal Lim | Kramer Alberti Lim & Tonkovich LLP | Plaintiff Performance Rank | 41 | 52 |
| Marc Belloli | Bunsow De Mory | Plaintiff Activity Rank | 58 | 64 |
| Eric A. Buresh | Erise IP P.A. | Defendant Activity Rank | 58 | 37 |
| Ryan Pinckney | Alavi Anaipakos, PLLC | Plaintiff Activity Rank | 81 | 122 |
| Russ Emerson | Haynes and Boone, LLP | Defendant Activity Rank | 106 | 30 |
| Alden Harris | Heim, Payne & Chorush LLP | Plaintiff Activity Rank | 154 | 34 |
| Bradford A. Cangro | PV Law LLP | Defendant Activity Rank | 154 | 24 |
| Timothy J. Rousseau | Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. | Plaintiff Performance Rank | 189 | 34 |
| Michael A. Albert | Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks | Plaintiff Performance Rank | 212 | 23 |
| Marc E. Hankin | Hankin Patent Law | Plaintiff Activity Rank | 245 | 30 |
| James Chung-Yul Yoon | Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati | Defendant Activity Rank | 287 | 28 |
About the Rankings
Patent litigation rankings offer valuable insights into the most experienced and effective attorneys handling patent disputes. For companies seeking to protect their innovations, these rankings serve as a trusted resource to identify the most capable legal partners.
Beyond helping companies, the rankings provide strategic value to attorneys and law firms. They enable legal professionals to benchmark their performance, refine litigation strategies, and highlight their strengths to potential clients. In addition, the report offers a broader perspective on industry trends, judicial behavior, and key players, assisting attorneys in making informed decisions about business development, career moves, and partnerships.
Our evaluation combines both activity and performance. Activity rankings are based on factors such as the number of cases an attorney handled and the patents involved, while performance rankings rely on a detailed analysis of case outcomes in terminated matters.
For more details on how we evaluate and rank attorneys, please refer to our full methodology.
Access the Full Report
The Patent Litigation Intelligence Report 2025 provides a comprehensive analysis of the patent litigation landscape, featuring in-depth statistics on district court activity, IPC codes, case outcomes, and more. In addition to attorney rankings, the report includes full data and rankings for the top 2,000 most active law firms and companies, as well as insights into judicial activity. It also examines attorney lateral moves, an important dynamic which we will explore in next insight. For the full set of rankings and a deeper dive into litigation trends, the complete report is available here.