Partner
Forrest Jones focuses on patent litigation, including at the International Trade Commission (ITC), as well as inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He has technical and legal experience in various areas of electrical and computer engineering, including computer software, signal processing, wireless networking, power electronics, power generation, and consumer electronics such as televisions, laptop computers, smartphones, and gaming systems.
Forrest manages complex litigations spanning multiple venues at all stages from the filing through trial, including drafting case dispositive motions and briefs, arguing claim construction in Markman hearings, taking and defending expert depositions, and preparing witnesses to testify at trial. His litigation experience encompasses the full litigation process, including management of complex document review; preparing trial examination and cross examination; and drafting pre-trial motions, pre-trial briefs, and post-trial briefs. He also has experience representing clients in international arbitration. He was a member of a team that defended various Sony entities in patent infringement lawsuits involving electrical and software technologies brought in the E.D. Texas, D. Delaware, and D. Massachusetts, as well as in arbitration issues before the Japan Commercial Arbitration Association (JCAA).
Forrest devotes time to pro-bono matters, representing indigent clients in a number of different civil matters. He is listed on the Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll.
Member of team that represented OpenTV in a patent infringement suit pertaining to e-commerce systems, information security measures, streaming technologies, media interfaces, and software verification features in Apple’s iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, Apple TV, and MacBook products.
3:14-cv-01622; 5:15-cv-02008, N.D. Cal., Judges Cousins, Davila, Freeman, Gillam, Ryu, Tigar, Westmore
337-TA-1267, ITC, Judge Bhattacharyya
United States Automobile Association v. Truist Bank
2:22-cv-00291, E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap
IPR2022-01593, IPR2023-00143, -00144, -00183, -00184, -00829, PTAB, Judges Dirba, Droesch, McMillin, White, Zecher
3:20-cv-00603, D. Nev., Judge Du
IPR2021-00951, -00952, -00953, PTAB
Certain LED Lighting Devices, LED Power Supplies, and Components Thereof
Represented Complainant Philips Lighting in an International Trade Commission investigation against Lowe’s, Feit Electric, and Satco, among others, on LED lighting technologies.
337-TA-1081, ITC, Judge Lord
NICE Ltd. et al v. CallMiner Inc.
1:18-cv-02024, D. Del., Judge Andrews
Federal Circuit IP Blog
Defendants Can Recover Fees for “Baseless” Infringement Allegations Even When Non-Infringement Decision Vacated as Moot by IPR, but Cannot Recover from Counsel or for the Related IPR Defendants Can Recover Fees for “Baseless” Infringement Allegations Even When Non-Infringement Decision Vacated as Moot by IPR, but Cannot Recover from Counsel or for the Related IPR
June 12, 2024
Federal Circuit IP Blog
The Shifting Burdens in Computer Software Copyrightability The Shifting Burdens in Computer Software Copyrightability
May 5, 2023
INCONTESTABLE® Blog
Software Unfiltered: The Shifting Burdens in Computer Software Copyrightability Software Unfiltered: The Shifting Burdens in Computer Software Copyrightability
May 3, 2023
At the PTAB Blog
The Reports of Shaw’s Death Were Not Greatly Exaggerated: Federal Circuit Confirms IPR Estoppel Applies to All Potential Grounds at the Petition Stage The Reports of Shaw’s Death Were Not Greatly Exaggerated: Federal Circuit Confirms IPR Estoppel Applies to All Potential Grounds at the Petition Stage
February 9, 2022
Federal Circuit IP Blog
Transaction Authentication Claims Using Known Computer Components Are Patent Ineligible Transaction Authentication Claims Using Known Computer Components Are Patent Ineligible
August 31, 2021
Articles
Will 101 Be a Nemesis to Warner Brothers’ Patent? Will 101 Be a Nemesis to Warner Brothers’ Patent?
July 13, 2021
Westlaw TodayPress Release
Finnegan Secures Third Straight Victory for BMW Group Against Patent Assertion Entity Finnegan Secures Third Straight Victory for BMW Group Against Patent Assertion Entity
February 6, 2024
Media Mention
Patent Biz Can't Save IP Case Against BMW, Judge Says Patent Biz Can't Save IP Case Against BMW, Judge Says
December 15, 2022
Law360Press Release
Finnegan Secures ITC Win on Behalf of BMW Finnegan Secures ITC Win on Behalf of BMW
December 9, 2022
Media Mention
ITC Won't Upend Ruling Clearing BMW, GM in Patent Case ITC Won't Upend Ruling Clearing BMW, GM in Patent Case
December 9, 2022
Law360Press Release
Finnegan Welcomes Eight New Partners Finnegan Welcomes Eight New Partners
January 3, 2022
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.