Palo Alto PHONE: 650.838.4413 FAX: 650.838.4350 Download V-Card > Download Resume >

Daniel (Dan) T. Shvodian



Dan Shvodian is a partner in the firm's Patent Litigation practice whose practice is primarily focused in the area of intellectual property litigation. He has represented clients in both state and federal court and before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in matters concerning patent infringement, copyright violations, unfair competition, breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation. He has utilized his engineering experience while representing clients in matters involving electrical and computer technology, and has also represented clients in numerous matters involving biotechnical and biomedical technology. Dan also has represented clients in matters pending before the US International Trade Commission (ITC) under Section 337. Before entering the legal practice, Dan worked for seven years for the Army Research Laboratory in Adelphi, Maryland, as an electrical engineer. His work there included designing the digital portion of a spread spectrum communication system; writing software for communication, data processing and control applications; designing digital data processing boards; integrating navigational systems with an in-flight computer; performing diagnostic analyses and repairs; and creating 3-D computer models for simulation analyses. Dan was named a 2009 Top IP Litigator in the State of California by the San Francisco and Los Angeles Daily Journal.


  • Asyst Techs., Inc. v. Emtrak, Inc. Successfully defended Emtrak, Jenoptik AG and Jenoptik Infab, Inc. against charges of patent infringement. Obtained summary judgment of noninfringement of all asserted patent claims, and the judgment was partially affirmed on appeal. Following remand, obtained judgment as a matter of law that all remaining patent claims are invalid due to obviousness.
  • Patent Litigation Matter for High-Tech Silicon Valley Based Client. In defending a client against infringement claims, personally uncovered evidence that the inventor fabricated documents submitted to the patent office to establish priority over a cited reference.  Then worked with a forensic computer specialist to uncover evidence of additional documents that had been fabricated and backdated.  The case then settled on highly favorable terms. 
  • Monsanto Co. v. Bayer Cropscience, N.V. Brought a successful declaratory judgment action in regard to a patent relating to bioengineered crops. The jury found the patent claims invalid and not infringed. Following a bench trial, the court held the patents-in-suit unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. 
  • Plant Genetic Sys., N.V. v. DEKALB Genetics Corp. Successfully defended DEKALB against an allegation of patent infringement. All asserted claims were held invalid or not infringed. The judgment was affirmed on appeal. 
  • Neothermia Corp. v. Rubicor Med., Inc. Represented Rubicor against claims of patent infringement and trade secret theft regarding a medical device for breast cancer diagnosis. The plaintiff dismissed all claims. 
  • PLC Med. Sys., Inc. v. Eclipse Surgical Techs., Inc. Defended Eclipse Surgical against charges of copyright violation. After a successful defense against preliminary injunction motion, the matter was settled. 
  • In the Matter of Certain Baseband Processor Chips and Chipsets, Transmitter and Receiver (Radio) Chips, Power Control Chips, and Products Containing Same, Including Cellular Telephone Handsets. Represented third-party intervenor Kyocera Wireless Corp. in the remedy phase of an ITC investigation regarding wireless communication technology. 
  • Intel Corp. v. VIA Techs. Represented Intel in multiple patent infringement actions alleging infringement of semiconductor chipset patents. The matter was settled. 
  • Gripple Ltd. v. Quiedan Co. Represented Gripple in an action alleging infringement of a patent on wine trellising devices, and trade dress infringement. The matter was settled shortly after Gripple obtained a preliminary injunction.
  • Dan has represented pro bono clients in unlawful detainer actions, in predatory lending litigation and on an appeal in opposition to a redevelopment plan.

Professional Recognition

  • Listed in Super Lawyers, Northern California, 2013

Professional Leadership

  • American Bar Association, Member
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association, Member
  • San Francisco Intellectual Property Law Association, Member
  • Silicon Valley Intellectual Property Law Association, Member

Related Employment

  • Howrey, Palo Alto, CA, Partner
  • Arnold White & Durkee, Associate


  • University of Virginia School of Law, J.D., 1996
  • University of Maryland, M.S.E.E., 1990
  • Bucknell University, B.S.E.E., magna cum laude, 1987

Bar Admissions

  • California
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Court Admissions

  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California