Russell Tonkovich

Partner

contact

650.825.4300 x106
rtonkovich@feinday.com

Russell’s practice focuses on patent litigation and monetization. He is a nationally recognized patent litigator who has won verdicts in some of the largest patent infringement cases in the country. Russell has successfully led patent litigation teams to success at trial and has achieved significant settlements for his clients.

Russell has represented Fortune 500 companies as well as startup companies in patent litigation involving a wide variety of technologies relating to pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, DNA arrays and sequencing, semiconductors, LED technology, smartphones and tablets, consumer electronics, optical networking, internet technologies, computer software, and computer networking.

Russell has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in variety of venues throughout the country including in district courts, the Patent Trials and Appeals Board, and the International Trade Commission. Russell also has significant experience representing clients in the Federal Circuit regarding appeals and writs of mandamus.

Russell has over 17 years of experience in patent litigation. Prior to joining Feinberg Day, Russell worked at Wilmer Hale and Kirkland and Ellis as a patent litigator.

significant matters
University of Michigan v. Leica Microsystems, Inc. (N.D. California) Dr. Tonkovich represents University of Michigan in an important patent infringement action enforcing the university’s leading edge patented microscope technology.
Broadband iTV, Inc. v. AT&T, DirecTV, Dish Network LLC (W.D. Texas) Dr. Tonkovich represents pioneering video on demand and content management technology company, BBiTV, in three consolidated 5-patent cases filed in December 2019.
Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Ltd. (E.D. Texas) Dr. Tonkovich represented Polaris in a patent infringement case involving automatic brightness control technology implemented in Samsung mobile phones and televisions. Polaris won the claim construction and nearly all pre-trial motions. The case settled favorably on confidential terms on the eve of jury trial after defeating Samsung’s motions for summary judgment, Daubert motions and motions to strike expert opinions, and motions in limine.
Finisar Corp. v. Nistica, Inc. (N.D. Cal. and Fed. Cir.) Dr. Tonkovich represented Nistica in an appeal and secured a victory in the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. The Federal Circuit unanimously affirmed Nistica’s verdict of noninfringement in two jury trials in the Northern District of California.
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (N.D. Cal.) Represented Apple in a patent infringement action resulting in a jury trial in which Samsung was found to infringe Apple’s patents.
Millenium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. et al. (D. Del.) Represented Millenium Pharmaceuticals in patent infringement litigation against Sandoz, Accord Healthcare, Acatavis, and Fresenius arising out of their filing of abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs). Millenium asserted infringement of two patents relating to pharmaceutical formulations.
In the Matter of Certain Mobile Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communications Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computers, International Trade Commission Inv. No. 337-TA-794.  Represented Apple in a trial victory in an ITC investigation brought by Samsung alleging infringement of five of Samsung’s patents.
In the Matter of Certain Electronic Products, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players and Computers, International Trade Commission Inv. No. 337-TA-701.  Represented Apple in a trial victory in an ITC investigation brought by Nokia alleging infringement of seven patents.
In the Matter of Certain Microprocessors, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, International Trade Commission Inv. No. 337-TA-781.  Represented Hewlett-Packard, Intel, and Apple in a trial victory in an ITC investigation brought by X2Y Attenuators, LLC alleging infringement of 6 patents relating to circuit design.
Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. TEVA Parenteral Medicines, Inc. (D. Del.).  Represented Cubist Pharmaceuticals in patent infringement litigation arising from TEVA’s abbreviated new drug application (ANDA). Achieved a favorable settlement on behalf of Cubist Pharmaceuticals.
Centocor, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. et al. (C.D. Cal.). Represented Genentech in a declaratory judgment action brought by Centocor seeking a declaration that one of Genentech's patents is invalid, unenforceable, and not infringed by Centocor's products. Achieved a favorable settlement.
education
Juris Doctor
Harvard Law School

Medical Doctor (M.D.)
University of Illinois

Bachelor of Science (with Honors), Biochemistry
University of Wisconsin-Madison
admissions
Admitted to practice in California; registered to practice before the USPTO
N.D. California, C.D. California, E.D. Texas, Federal Circuit
venue experience
N.D. California
C.D. California
E.D. Texas
International Trade Commission
W.D. Texas
Delaware