Fabio Marino

Fabio Marino, a partner in the Silicon Valley office, is a member of the Intellectual Property Group and chair of the Networking Practice Group.  Mr. Marino's practice focuses on intellectual property law with an emphasis on patent litigation.  Chambers USA describes him as "one of the go-to names in the business" who is admired for "his courtroom presence and impressive skills as a patent litigator."

Mr. Marino has technical expertise in computer networks, software engineering, e-commerce, entertainment and Internet-related technologies, computer architecture, digital circuit design, parallel computing, 3-D graphics and animation, medical imaging and artificial intelligence. 

The following is a sample of his notable cases/clients.

• Brocade v. A10 Networks. Currently representing Brocade in a patent infringement action before Judge Farnan in the District of Delaware.  The case involves nine patents on load balancing and high-availability of networking devices. The case is not yet scheduled for trial.
• Nomadix v. iBahn et al. Currently representing iBahn in a patent infringement action before Judge Pregerson in the Central District of California.  The case involves eight patents on network access devices.  The case is not yet scheduled for trial.
• First American CoreLogic v. Fiserv et al. Currently representing CoreLogic in a patent infringement action before Judge Ward in the Eastern District of Texas.  The case involves a patent on automated valuation models.  The case is not yet scheduled for trial.
• Fuzzysharp v. NVIDIA. Currently defending NVIDIA in a patent infringement action before Judge Ware in the Northern District of California.  The case involves two patents on computer graphics. The case is not yet scheduled for trial.
• Rambus v. NVIDIA. Currently defending NVIDIA in a patent infringement action before Judge Ilston in the Northern District of California.  The case involves nine patents on memory controllers.  The case is not yet scheduled for trial.
• Rembrandt v. Fox.  Currently defending a patent infringement action before Judge Sleet in the District of Delaware.  The case involves a patent on forward error correction techniques allegedly used in television broadcasts.  The case is not yet scheduled for trial.
• Enterasys v. Foundry Networks.  Currently defending a patent infringement action before Judge Woodlock in the District of Massachusetts.  The case involves a total of six patents on Local Area Network (LAN) and Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) technologies.  The case is not yet scheduled for trial. 
• Actus v. Amazon et al. Defended Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Cabela's, eBay and U.S. Bank in a patent infringement action before Judge Ward in the Eastern District of Texas.  The case involves four patents on electronic payment methods.  The case settled favorably.
• In Re GPS Devices.  Defended a patent infringement action before the International Trade Commission.  The case involved six patents related to GPS technology. 
• Alcatel v. Foundry Networks.  Prosecuted and defended a patent infringement action in the District of Delaware.  The case involved a total of nine patents on Local Area Network (LAN), Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technologies.  The case settled favorably.
• Ciena v. Nortel Networks and Nortel Networks  v. Ciena.  Led the prosecution and defense of two parallel patent infringement actions in the Eastern District of Texas.  The two actions involved a total of 38 patents on optical networking, Local Area Network (LAN) and Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) networking technologies.  The case settled favorably.
• New York University v. Epiphany.  Defended a customer relationship management software company against patent infringement claims brought by a leading university in the Southern District of New York.  The case settled favorably.
• Foundry Networks v. Nortel Networks.  Prosecuted and defended a patent infringement action involving seven patents in Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) and Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) networking technologies in the Northern District of California.  The case settled favorably.
• Cable & Wireless v. Akamai.  Defended a leading content delivery network against patent infringement claims brought by a leading telecommunications company in the Northern District of California.  The case settled favorably.
• Alpha 2010 v. Radiant Telecom.  Defended a calling card company against patent infringement claims brought by an independent inventor in the Central District of California.  The case was dismissed.
• In Re Flash RAMs.  Prosecuted a patent infringement action involving four DRAM and Flash RAM patents on behalf of a leading Taiwanese semiconductor memory manufacturer against leading Japanese semiconductor memory companies before the International Trade Commission.  The case settled favorably.
• In Re HSP Modems.  Prosecuted a patent infringement action involving two software modem patents on behalf of a leading software modem company against leading telecommunications companies before the International Trade Commission.  The case settled favorably after finding of infringement.
• Mosel Vitelic v. Micron.  Prosecuted and defended a patent infringement action involving 12 semiconductor memory patents on behalf of a leading Taiwanese semiconductor memory manufacturer against a leading U.S. semiconductor memory company in the District of Delaware.  The case settled favorably.
• Semiconductor Energy Laboratory v. Samsung.  Defended Samsung against patent infringement claims involving three semiconductor manufacturing patents brought by SEL in the Eastern District of Virginia.  Samsung prevailed at trial, and the decision was upheld by CAFC.

Before joining Orrick, Mr. Marino was co-chair of Bingham McCutchen's Intellectual Property Group.  Prior to attending law school, Mr. Marino was a software consultant and system architect for several Fortune 100 clients.

Admitted in

• California
• United States Patent and Trademark Office

Court Admissions

• Central District of California
• Eastern District of Texas
• Northern District of California

Memberships

• State Bar of California
• American Intellectual Property Law Association
• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
• Association for Computing Machinery
• Bay Area IP Inn of Court

Multimedia

Publications

• “District Court Holds Patent Exhaustion Under Quanta Applies to Authorized Foreign Sales,” Orrick Client Alert, March 24, 2009.
• Co-Author, “Federal Circuit Upholds Three of Four Controversial New Patent Rules,” Orrick Client Alert, March 23, 2009.
• Co-Author, “Controversial Rule 706 (Neutral Technical Expert Procedure) Survives Federal Circuit Scrutiny,” Orrick Client Alert, March 09, 2009.
• Co-Author, "How trolls can circumvent eBay," Managing IP, Fabio Marino and Bas de Blank, October 2008.
• Co-Author, “Federal Circuit Expands Scope of Inter Partes Re-Examinations,” Orrick Client Alert, August 25, 2008.
• Co-Author, “New ITC Rules Impact Litigation,” Orrick Client Alert, July 08, 2008.
• Co-Author, “Long-Awaited Decision Applies Patent Exhaustion to Method Patents,” Orrick Client Alert, June 12, 2008.
• "The Federal Circuit Decision in Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Technologies AG," Intellectual Property Today, Fabio Marino and Jamie Nye, June 2003.
• "Europe Opens The Door Wider To Software Patents," Intellectual Property Today, Fabio Marino and Omkar K. Suryadevara, October 1999.
• "A Strategic Approach to Intellectual Property Protection for Software," Intellectual Property Today, Fabio Marino and Michael J. Schallop, February 1999.

Speeches & Programs

• "Supreme Court’s Bilski v. Kappos Decision," Orrick MCLE Seminar (June 30, 2010)
• Mr. Marino is a frequent speaker at MCLE conferences on intellectual property litigation and counseling matters. He is an Adjunct Professor of Law at Santa Clara University and a regular lecturer for BarBri's Patent Bar Review.