Han Xu

Counsel

Han is temporarily on a full-time client secondment.

xu-han-200
  • JD, cum laude, Georgetown University Law Center, 2008; Editor, Georgetown Law Journal
  • Certificate in Chinese Law, Tsinghua University Law School, 2008
  • MS (Biostatistics), University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2005
  • BS (Computer Science and Economics, Minor in Mathematics), University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2003

Qualifications

  • Massachusetts, 2008
  • Japan, Gaikokuho Jimu Bengoshi (Massachusetts), 2012
  • New York, 2012
  • Chinese (Mandarin)

Han Xu

Counsel

Han is temporarily on a full-time client secondment.

Han is a counsel in the Boston office currently on assignment to the Tokyo office. He has litigation experience covering a broad range of technologies, including computer hardware and software, semiconductors, web technologies, wireless and mobile communications, image sensors, electronics for flow measurement systems, mobile phones, vehicle telematics, and enterprise information management and administration systems. Han also has extensive experience representing clients in post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Experience

  • Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (CBM2012-00002, CBM2012-00003, CBM2012-00004, CBM2013-00003, CBM2013-00004, CBM2013-00009) – We filed six petitions for covered business method review in connection with our defense of Liberty Mutual against assertions of three different patents relating to determining a cost of insurance based on vehicle monitoring in Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. v. Safeco Insurance Co., et al. After our ex parte reexamination of the originally asserted patent resulted in Progressive’s amendment of every remaining claim while litigation was stayed, we filed CBM petitions challenging the amended claims and two later-asserted patents. The board initiated CBM trials on every claim of these three patents, and, as noted above, we successfully stayed the related district court litigation. On January 23, 2014, the Board issued final written decisions in CBM2012-00002 and -00004 – the Board’s first final written CBM decisions on prior art grounds – invalidating all claims of the patent challenged in those trials. On February 11, 2014, the Board issued final written decisions in CBM2012-00003 and 2013-00009, invalidating all claims of the patent challenged in those trials. And on March 13, 2014, the Board issued a final written decision in CBM2013-00004, invalidating all claims of the patent challenged in that trial. Thus, every claim of every one of these three challenged patents has been held unpatentable in a final written decision from the Board.
  • Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (CBM2012-00010, CBM2012-00011, CBM2013-00001, CBM2013-00002) – We filed four petitions for CBM review in defending Liberty Mutual against assertions of two different patents relating to an Internet online insurance policy service in Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. v. Safeco Insurance Co., et al. The Board initiated trials on every claim of both challenged patents. As noted above, we successfully stayed the related district court litigation pending the outcome of these CBM proceedings. On February 24, 2014, the Board issued final written decisions in CBM2012-00010 and CBM2013-00002, invalidating all claims of both challenged patents.
  • Spansion LLC (IPR2014-00103, IPR2014-00104, IPR2014-00105, IPR2014-00106, IPR2014-00107, IPR2014-00108). Defending six semiconductor- and memory-related Spansion patents in Inter Partes Review petitions filed by petitioner Macronix.
  • Eolas v. Adobe et al. (E.D.Texas):  Represented defendants Google Inc. and YouTube, LLC in securing victory in a case brought by Eolas Technologies Inc. on two patents that it contended cover all web sites containing interactive content.  After a four-day invalidity trial involving multiple defendants, an Eastern District of Texas jury returned a verdict that all asserted claims of both patents are invalid.
  • Progressive v. Liberty Mutual Insurance (N.D. Ohio): Representing Liberty Mutual defendants in multiple patent litigations involving vehicle telematics and web-based customer service systems.
  • Microlog v. Cisco et al. (E.D. Texas): Representing defendant Stonebridge Life Insurance Co. in patent litigation involving information management systems.
  • Micro Motion, Inc. v. Krohne, Inc. et al. (D. Mass): Represented plaintiff Micro Motion in patent litigation involving meter electronics for Coriolis mass flowmeters.
  • Lincoln National Life Insurance v. Transamerica (N.D. Iowa, N.D. Indiana, Federal Circuit) - Represented defendant Transamerica in patent litigation through trial and on appeal to Federal Circuit resulting in finding of non-infringement of one of Lincoln’s patents involving computerized administration systems.
  • Value-Security v. AEGON Direct/Transamerica Life Insurance Company (D. Maryland) – Represented defendant Aegon in obtaining dismissal of insurance patent and trade secret misappropriation claims related to insurance underwriting.

Publications