Mark D. Rowland


  • JD, The George Washington University Law School, 1986
  • BS (Electrical Engineering), University of Notre Dame, 1983


  • California
  • New York
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Court Admissions

  • U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • American Bar Association
  • Peninsula Intellectual Property Law Association
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Silicon Valley Intellectual Property Law Association 


  • Member of the Board, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
  • Legal 500 (2018)
  • The Best Lawyers in America (2009-2016, 2018-2021)
  • Northern California Super Lawyers (2013-2016)
  • The Daily Journal’s “Top 75 IP Litigators in California” (2013)
  • The Daily Journal’s “Top 75 IP Litigators in California (2012)
  • Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business (2009-2011)

Mark D. Rowland


Mark Rowland is one of the premier patent litigators in the semiconductor industry. With more than 30 years of experience working with semiconductor and other technology companies, Mark has successfully resolved more than 50 cases through litigation, arbitration, inter partes review and patent reexamination proceedings. Located in the heart of Silicon Valley, where he was a founder of the office, Mark has worked for many high tech giants including: 

  • Motorola Mobility    
  • Linear Technology
  • AMD
  • Silicon Laboratories
  • NXP 
  • Ricoh
  • KLA Tencor
  • Varian Semiconductor
  • Emulex
  • Adaptec
  • Spansion

Mark’s deep understanding of his clients’ technologies and business goals enables him to solve their most complex patent cases efficiently and reliably. Mark was elected to the Board of The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley in 2013.


  • CPI Card Group v. Multi Packaging Solutions – Representing a manufacturer in district court patent infringement litigation and as petitioner in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings relating to process for making point-of-sale activatable card packaging.
  • NXP USA v. NFCT Technology – Representing semiconductor company in multiple IPRs and appeal involving contactless readers, near field communications and RFID technology.
  • Rovi v. Comcast – Representing a developer of interactive program guide technology in multiple ITC, district court litigation and PTAB proceedings in connection with patent licensing dispute.   
  • Broadcom v. NXP Semiconductors – Obtained dismissal of foreign parents in a patent infringement case involving analog circuit technologies, cryptography, and secure authentication.
  • Motorola Mobility v. Microsoft – Litigation in the ITC and district courts relating to video compression, interface software, wireless communication and other technologies, including initial determination of infringement and validity of asserted patents in the ITC. 
  • Droplets v. A Major Electronics Company and WRT v. Ricoh – Successfully moved for transfer of multi-defendant cases from EDTX to NDCA. 
  • CeeColor v. AuthenTec and Summit Data v. Adaptec – Obtained dismissal with prejudice prior to answer. 
  • Cybersource v. Retail Decisions – Successfully moved to invalidate Internet-based fraud detection software patent on summary judgment under In Re Bilski.  
  • Linear Technology v. Micrel – After initially prosecuting original patent on integrated circuit voltage regulators, and defending it through multiple reexaminations and on-sale bar challenge, obtained a willful infringement verdict.  
  • Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates v. Applied Materials – Arbitrated infringement of patents relating to equipment for manufacturing semiconductors, resulting in award of royalties pursuant to a patent license.  
  • E-Pass Technologies v. PalmSource – Summary judgment of noninfringement and award of attorney fees upheld on appeal in patent case relating to handheld computer devices.



  • Co-presenter, “Shared Patent Rights: Lessons From the Front Line – Innovative Ways for Companies to Defend or Support the Commercialization of Products Using Shared Patent Rights,” Association of Corporate Counsel Patent Committee Seminars in San Francisco and Palo Alto (March 17-18, 2015)
  • Speaker, “Latest Developments in IP Litigation & More,” Institute for Advanced Corporate Counsel (iACC) 2.0 - Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC), Santa Clara, CA (May, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Year in Review: 2012 Patent Litigation Legal Landscape and Lessons Learned,” Association of Corporate Counsel - Bay Area Chapter (January 2013)
  • Panelist, “What You Need To Know About Mobile Patent Wars,” Association of Corporate Counsel - Bay Area Chapter (July 2012)
  • Speaker, “Northern District of California Strategies and Pitfalls,” Venue-Based Patent Litigation Strategies, San Francisco, PLI (July 2010)
  • JD, The George Washington University Law School, 1986
  • BS (Electrical Engineering), University of Notre Dame, 1983
Cookie Settings