M. Scott Fuller is a patent litigator with experience representing Fortune 500 clients in complex cases across the United States. In his career, he has defended such companies as Microsoft, Huawei, HSBC, and Citigroup against claims of patent infringement involving a wide range of technologies. In addition, he has represented individual inventors and patent owners as plaintiff’s counsel in enforcement actions against infringing companies. His experiences representing both defendants and plaintiffs gives him unique perspectives as trial counsel, which he uses to the benefit of his clients. In his long career, Mr. Fuller has litigated a wide variety of technologies, and he has seen just about every litigation tactic in the book from opposing counsel. A no-nonsense litigator, Mr. Fuller is able to cut through the distractions in order to get to the important, dispositive issues.
Mr. Fuller is a former registered professional structural engineer in the State of Texas, and he is registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. He has represented clients in district courts from California to Texas to New York, as has argued to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Education and Experience:
Mr. Fuller received his law degree with honors from Southern Methodist University Law School. His entire legal career has previously been with the international firm Locke Lord LLP, where Scott was a partner and co-chair of the firm’s Texas IP Litigation Practice Group. Prior to attending SMU, Scott received his undergraduate engineering degree from the University of Texas at Austin, and he worked as a licensed professional structural engineer in the State of Texas.
Admitted to the following courts:
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Supreme Court of Texas
Representative matters:
Cypress Lake Software, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics, et al., 6:18-cv-0030 (E.D. Tex.) (Judge Robert Schroeder III). Represented Cypress Lake in related patent infringement matters concerning multimedia streaming and user interfaces.
Blue Spike LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. et al., 2:15-cv-1780 and 6:13-cv-0679 (E.D. Tex.) (Judges Ron Clark and Robert Schroeder III). Represented Huawei Technologies in related patent infringement matters concerning copy protection methodologies and the Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) technique for randomizing memory storage locations.
Realtime Data LLC v. HSBC Bank USA N.A., et al., 6:09-cv-0326 (E.D. Tex.) (Judge Leonard Davis); Case transferred under 28 U.S.C. 1404 by Writ of Mandamus issued from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to the Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:11-cv-6696 (Judge Katherine B. Forrest). Represented HSBC Bank in multi-defendant patent litigation concerning the compression and decompression of financial market data.
Emmanuel C. Gonzalez v. New Life Ventures, 2:14-cv-0906 (E.D. Tex.) (Judge Rodney Gilstrap). Represented patentee in various actions for infringement of his portfolio relating to the creation, retrieval, and manipulation of Internet postings/websites using specifically-defined digital labels. This matter was tried to a jury, who found in favor of my client, Mr. Gonzalez. The asserted patents were later declared invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, following appeal to the Federal Circuit.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Electronics for Imaging, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., et al., 5:01-cv0544-DF (E.D. Tex.) (Judge David Folsom). Represented Microsoft in one of the largest multi-defendant patent infringement lawsuits ever filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The patent at issue related to color processing and the creation of accurate color reproductions. Case included two separate appeals to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit before ultimately concluding in judgment and dismissal for Microsoft.
