Marc Belloli



650.825.4300 x107

Marc is a founding partner of Feinberg Day. His practice has focused on patent litigation and patent monetization throughout his career.  He has successfully tried cases and obtained favorable settlements for his clients in venues across the country.

In 2021, he was the architect of a damages case that resulted in a $172.5M jury verdict for a plaintiff client.  In the same case, he secured judgment as a matter of law against the defendant’s prior art defenses before the case went to the jury, leaving the defendant essentially without any defense for the jury to consider.

He has tried and managed a multitude of highly complex cases involving diverse technological areas, including semiconductor packaging, Wi-Fi and cellular communications, smartphones, flash memory, computer security, computer networking, data compression, interactive television and content delivery, among many others.

Marc has led teams in dozens of patent infringement litigations on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants, handling all aspects of the cases including trial and appeals to the Federal Circuit. In addition to handling litigation matters, Marc is experienced at assisting clients in monetizing their intellectual property outside of litigation.

Prior to founding Feinberg Day, Marc was a part of the IP litigation group at DLA Piper.

significant matters
Wapp Technologies, LLC v. Micro Focus, Inc., HP Enterprises, Inc. Represented Wapp Technologies in a jury trial that resulted in $172.5 million jury verdict of willful infringement.
OpenTV, Inc. v. NFL Enterprises, LLC. Represented OpenTV in a seven patent case involving verifying PIN codes giving users access to password-restricted websites and applications, methods of inserting content into video streams using time-code indicators, methods of allowing users to interact with videos and a method of connecting multiple video metadata sets, methods of programming software to identify if a computer does not have the right applications to run certain media, methods of combining multiple media data streams into a single broadcast stream and methods of connecting streaming videos with other websites via a link.
Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II v. Motorola Mobility (District of Delaware and Southern District of Florida)  Represented Intellectual Ventures in back to back patent infringement trials in Delaware and won both trials. The asserted patents relate to technology in smart phones including sending MMS messages, power allocation and conservation and docking stations
Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture litigation (Eastern District of Texas) Represented representing a large consumer electronics company in a patent case involving memory architecture and video coding technology.
Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. litigation (Eastern District of Texas) Represented a large consumer electronics company in a patent case involving computer interface and data transfer technology.
Interval Licensing LLC. Litigation (Western District of Washington) Represented a large consumer electronics company in a patent case involving computer display technology.
DSS Technology Management, Inc. (Northern District of California) Represented a large consumer electronics company in a patent case involving Bluetooth technology.
Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Ltd. (E.D. Texas) Represented Polaris PowerLED in a substantial patent infringement case involving automatic brightness control technology implemented in Samsung mobile phones and televisions. The case settled favorably on confidential terms on the eve of jury trial.
University of Michigan v. Leica Microsystems, Inc. (N.D. California) Currently representing University of Michigan in a patent infringement action enforcing the University’s leading edge patented microscope technology
Intellectual Ventures II v. JPMorgan et. al. (Southern District of New York)  Represented representing Intellectual Ventures II in a patent infringement matter against several JPMorgan Chase entities. The asserted patent relates to a cryptographic co-processor for processing RSA or ECC algorithms.
Pragmatus AV LLC v. Yahoo! Inc. (District of Delaware) Represented Pragmatus in a five patent infringement action against Yahoo!. The case involved distributed video teleconferencing technology.
Pragmatus AV LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc. (Southern District of Florida) Represented Plaintiff Pragmatus in a four patent infringement action against Citrix. The case involved distributed video teleconferencing technology.
MicroUnity v. Palm (Eastern District of Texas) Represented Palm in a twelve patent infringement action against MicroUnity. The case involved microprocessor technology.
Xpoint v. Palm (District of Delaware) Represented Palm in a patent infringement action against Xpoint. The case involved microprocessor technology.
U.S. Philips v. Palm (Northern District of California) Represented Palm in a patent infringement action against Philips. The case involved wireless consumer devices.
EON v. Palm (District of Delaware, Eastern District of Texas) Represented Palm in two patent infringement actions against EON. The case involved wireless consumer devices.
Juris Doctor, University of California Hastings College of the Law

Bachelor of Arts, Economics, University of Pennsylvania
Admitted to practice in California
N.D. California, C.D. California, S.D. California, E.D. Texas, Federal Circuit, United States Supreme Court
venue experience
N.D. California
C.D. California
S.D. California
E.D. Texas
International Trade Commission
W.D. Texas, Delaware
E.D. Virginia
S.D. New York