Kevin Post works extensively with high-technology and life science companies handling their complex patent disputes. He has litigated patent cases in nearly every significant patent jurisdiction, including the International Trade Commission, the District of Delaware, the Northern District of California, the Eastern District of Texas, the Eastern District of Virginia, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on behalf of companies in a variety of technical fields, including cellular and wireless communications, video coding, networking, electronics, computer systems and software, network architecture and security, e-payments, e-commerce, imaging systems, GPS technology, process control systems, mechanical devices, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology. Kevin has tried multiple cases involving standard-essential patents and F/RAND licensing issues, including breach of contract cases. From providing licensing support, patent portfolio analysis, and due diligence to handling all aspects of trial preparation and trial, Kevin’s experience has touched on all phases of IP litigation.


  • Defending a large multinational consumer electronics company in worldwide litigation involving H.264 and H.265 video codec technology and FRAND issues.
  • Defending the world’s leading consumer electronics company in multiple matters involving 5G telecommunications technology and FRAND issues.
  • Represented Morgan Stanley in district court litigation involving trading systems.Also advising Morgan Stanley in patent assertion matters involving payment systems and user interfaces.
  • Collision Communications, Inc. v. Nokia Corp. et al.; Collision Communications, Inc. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al. (E.D. Tex.; D.N.H.): Represented Collision Communications in two cases in the Eastern District of Texas involving infringement of multiple 3G and 4G/LTE standard-essential patents by Nokia’s and Ericsson’s cellular infrastructure products and services. Also representing Collision in its separate breach of contract case against Nokia in the District of New Hampshire.
  • Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al.; Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. Nokia Corp. et al. (E.D. Tex.): Represented IP Bridge as lead counsel in two cases in the Eastern District of Texas involving assertion of multiple patents essential to 4G/LTE and 5G telecommunications standards against defendants’ cellular infrastructure products and services. 
  • Defended a major multinational telecommunications equipment company in an action alleging infringement of patents directed to various networking, LTE, and Power-Over-Ethernet technologies.
  • Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited et al. (D. Del.): Represented IP Bridge as trial counsel at jury trial in asserting standards-essential patents related to the 4G/LTE telecommunications standard. After seven-day trial, the jury found all four asserted claims essential, valid, and infringed and awarded FRAND damages. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court judgment in a precedential decision.
  • Represented TPG Global, LLC in patent infringement case involving eleven patents asserted against various portfolio companies; secured early dismissal without motion practice.
  • Advising several large, multinational technology companies in licensing negotiations involving standards-essential patents directed to cellular, telecommunications, networking, and video coding technologies.
  • Ragner Technology et al. v. National Express / Telebrands (D.N.J.): Represented patent owner Ragner Technology and exclusive licensee Tristar Products as co-lead counsel in a set of competitor cases, asserting patents covering expandable garden hoses and methods of use, as well as raising claims of false advertising and unfair competition. 
  • Represented StrikeForce Technologies, Inc. as co-lead counsel in a series of district court actions involving the assertion of its patents relating to out-of-band authentication techniques and systems. Cases included actions in the District of Massachusetts (Gemalto, Inc.; Vasco Data Security) and the Eastern District of Virginia (SecureAuth Corp.; Entrust, Inc.). Also represented StrikeForce in defense of one of its patents in inter partes review proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
  • Represent Samsung Electronics in multiple district court and ITC matters regarding image sensors and imaging software.
  • Defended the world’s leading consumer electronics company in district court litigation regarding electronic sale and transmission of music and video, and data storage and access systems.
  • Defended Samsung Electronics in an ITC Investigation brought by InterDigital related to 3G and 4G standards wireless standards and RAND licensing.
  • Defended the world’s leading consumer electronics company in district court litigation regarding computer operating systems.
  • Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola Mobility LLC. (W.D. Wash., W.D. Wis., S.D. Fla.): In the Matter of Certain Gaming and Entertainment Systems, Related Software, and Products Containing Same (337-TA-752): Represented Motorola in a multi-district dispute between Motorola and Microsoft involving patents directed to telecommunications standards, digital video coding technology, mobile browsing technology, digital set-top boxes, gaming technology, and smartphone features and functionality, among other technologies. The cases also involved contract-based claims directed to RAND licensing issues.
  • Motorola, Inc. v. Research In Motion, Ltd. (N.D. Tex.): In the Matter of Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices and Battery Packs (U.S.I.T.C.): Represented Motorola in an ITC Investigation against RIM involving five patents relating to telecommunications standards, battery packs and smartphone features, as well as district court litigation involving patent claims and contract claims related to RAND licensing.
  • Motorola, Inc. v. VTech Communications, Inc. (E.D. Tex.): Represented Motorola in a successfully concluded litigation involving six patents asserted against VTech relating to telecommunication products and features.
  • NTP, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. (E.D. Va.): Represented Motorola in defense of an eight-patent patent infringement lawsuit related to wireless e-mail technology.
  • Genetic Technologies Limited v. Agilent Technologies, Inc. (D. Colo., N.D. Cal.): Represented Agilent in defense of litigation regarding DNA testing and analysis.
  • Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc. v. Control Systems International, Inc. (S.D. Tex.): Represented Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc. in a two-patent cross-suit involving automated control systems for industrial processes.

Areas of Practice