Mark S. Parris, partner in the Seattle office, is a member of the Commercial Litigation and Intellectual Property Groups.

"An outstanding trial lawyer, very strategic, very responsive and very creative," according to Chambers USA's Guide to America's Leading Lawyers for Business. His experience includes litigating and assisting clients with drafting and negotiation of licenses and other contracts relating to the sale or distribution of hardware, software, medical devices, and other intellectual property and products.

Mark has substantial experience in representing clients in litigation and counseling concerning protection and misappropriation of trade secrets, enforcement of non-competition agreements and other competitive issues, as well as general commercial distribution practices and contracts. He was one of two patent litigators in Washington selected as an Amazing Attorney by Washington CEO magazine and was recently recognized as one of the top 30 trial lawyers in Washington. He has been a speaker nationally at various seminars on litigation and trial techniques. Mark has tried numerous cases - both jury and non-jury trials - has handled several arbitrations and mediations and has served as an expert witness.

In addition, Mark is a member of the firm’s Insurance Recovery Group. He has been named as the leading policy-holder side attorney in Washington State. He has represented several Fortune 500 companies as well as the State of Washington, the Washington Association of Municipal Attorneys and several cities, counties and port authorities in insurance coverage disputes.

Prior to joining Orrick, Mark was a partner at Heller Ehrman.

  • Mark's recent representations include the following:

    • Advanced Micro Devices v. Atmel Corporation (N.D. Cal.); Atmel v. AMD (N.D. Cal.); Seeq Technology v. Atmel (N.D. Cal.); Atmel v. Seeq Technology (N.D. Cal.); Intel Corporation v. Hyundai Electronics, et al. (N.D. Cal.); In the Matter of Certain Erasable Programmable Read Only Memories, etc. (ITC). The cases related to EPROMS, EEPROMS, and programmable logic devices (PLDs) and logic transition circuits. We acted as trial counsel in all but the Intel case, in which we acted as co-counsel on certain issues. In addition to the district court litigation, Intel also commenced parallel ITC proceedings seeking an exclusion order. We acted as co-counsel on issues arising after entry of an exclusion and cease and desist order.
    • Affymetrix, Inc. v. Multilyte, Ltd. (N.D. Cal.). Represented Multilyte in patent litigation involving micro array technology.
    • Atmel Corporation v. Silicon Storage Technology (SST) (N.D. Cal.). Represented Atmel in this patent infringement action. The patents relate to circuits and memory cell designs for flash memory and EEPROMs.
    • Backweb v. Microsoft (N.D. Cal.). Represented Microsoft in patent litigation involving network support technology.
    • Baden Corporation v. Molten Corporation (W.D. Wa.). Represented Molten in patent and unfair trade practice litigation concerning sports balls.
    • CRS LLC v. IGN Entertainment (W.D. Wa.). Represented one of the Fox family of companies concerning a software patent.
    • GE v. SonoSite (W.D. Wis.). Represented SonoSite in patent infringement litigation involving ultrasound devices.
    • In the Matter of Certain EPROM, EEPROM, FLASH MEMORY, etc. (ITC). Represented Atmel as complainant in an unfair trade practice claim relating to patents on EEPROM and Flash circuits and memory cell designs. The respondents were Sanyo, Macronix, and Winbond.
    • K2 v. Solomon S.A. and Solomon North America (W.D. Wa.). Represented Solomon in a series of patent infringement actions concerning in-line skates and snowboards.
    • Li v. Microsoft (China). Represented Microsoft in a series of patent litigation matters involving gaming technology.
    • NPI v. Gamber-Johnson (W.D. Wa.). Represented Gamber-Johnson in patent and unfair trade practice litigation involving a mechanical mounting device.
    • NetRatings v. Coremetrics (D. Del.). Represented Coremetrics in patent litigation involving embedded software.
    • RecogniCorp v. Nintendo (W.D. Wa.). Represented Nintendo in a patent infringement action involving the Wii.
    • Network Commerce v. Microsoft Corporation (W.D. Wa.). Represented Microsoft in a patent infringement action concerning an e-commerce patent.
    • ProCyte v. Allergan (W.D. Wa.). Represented Allergan in patent infringement action involving a medical product.
    • Sky Technologies v. Microsoft (D. Mass.). Represented Microsoft in patent litigation concerning CRM technology.
    • Value Click v. Revenue Science Inc. (C.D. Cal./E.D. Va.). Represented Revenue Science in patent infringement actions involving behavioral targeting software.
    • Varian Medical Systems v. Resonant Medical (W.D. Wa.). Represented Varian in patent litigation concerning a medical device.
    • Represented Computer Associates International in transactions and litigation involving IP issues.

    Other Representative Engagements:

    • Represented Stauffer Chemical Company as trial counsel in a products liability action stemming from its agri-chem business. The jury rendered a defense verdict following a multi-month trial.
    • Represented Asarco as trial counsel in its multi-site insurance coverage action arising out of arsenic and heavy metals contamination. The case settled during trial.
    • Represented Canron, Inc. in its environmental and insurance claims at the appellate levels, in which Canron prevailed on all of its claims.
    • Represented Leichner Brothers Land Recovery as trial counsel in its insurance case arising out of its landfill and waste recovery and recycling operations. The case settled during trial.
    • Represented Liquids, Inc. as trial counsel in two cases. The first case, a claim brought by its shareholders, resulted in a defense verdict after a multi-month jury trial. The second case, a products liability claim stemming from a chemical release, resulted in a defense verdict following a one month jury trial.
    • Represented Alcoa, Inc. in connection with its claims against more than 100 insurers for insurance coverage arising out of contamination at its domestic and international properties. After a successful six-month jury trial and appeal to the Washington Supreme Court, a global settlement was reached on the eve of a second trial.
    • Represented Univar Corporation and Van Waters and Rogers in connection with its insurance coverage action against 80 insurers arising from contamination at 35 of its chemical distribution facilities nationwide. The case settled following extensive discovery (300-plus depositions) on the eve of trial.
    • Represented Ebasco, Inc. as trial counsel in a securities fraud and professional liability action concerning a $2 billion bond default. The case settled after three months of trial.
    • Represented the State of Washington and various municipalities relating to insurance issues before the Washington State Supreme Court.
    • Represents Expedia as trial counsel in an insurance coverage action arising out of 70-plus lawsuits asserting tax-related claims. Secured a precedent-setting unanimous ruling from the Washington State Supreme Court.

News