James Batchelder and Andrew Radsch Recognized as Top Intellectual Property Lawyers by the Daily Journal

IP litigation partners James Batchelder and Andrew Radsch in the firm’s Silicon Valley office were honored as 2024 Top Intellectual Property Lawyers by the Daily Journal. The award recognizes the top performing intellectual property attorneys in California working in patent litigation, trademark and copyright.

Jim was recognized in a profile article as a member of the firm’s governing policy committee and a past managing partner of the firm’s Silicon Valley and San Francisco offices. His legal career includes appearances in U.S. federal district courts, before the U.S. International Trade Commission and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, including the Patent Trial and Appeal Board representing clients such as Emerson Electric, NetApp, Teradyne, and Collision Communications, among others.

Jim notes that he was drawn to IP law because he knew that he would always be learning—both about new technologies and changes in the law as the law tried to catch up with those technology changes. He recognized a trend in IP litigation going global, with more plaintiffs filing multiple lawsuits in a variety of international courts.

Andrew is profiled as representing plaintiff and defense clients in complex patent and trade secret disputes in federal courts across the nation, at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and at the International Trade Commission.

Throughout his career, Andrew has represented a global leader in cybersecurity, navigating the client through intricate multi-patent disputes. In a significant case, the client faced a lawsuit involving over a dozen patents. Andrew filed inter partes reviews on every claim of each patent before the court could even schedule a conference. The proactive approach enabled the client to obtain a stay of litigation and resulted in the cancellation of more than 120 claims. The decisions from the PTAB are under appeal.

On behalf of client Godo Kaisha IP Bridge, Andrew served as lead counsel in a bench trial in the Western District of Texas in a case related to complex DRAM technology. The court ultimately adopted all of the client’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in a resounding victory. This was critical because the legal questions involved issues of contract interpretation that had a profound impact on the client’s business.