Clark Gordon

Counsel

Clark Gordon is a seasoned trial lawyer and registered patent attorney with significant experience litigating high-stakes patent cases in federal courts nationwide, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and at the International Trade Commission. Clark represents patent owners and inventors in complex, multi-defendant litigations, and has helped secure significant outcomes for his clients through all phases of litigation—from pre-suit diligence through early case development and ultimately through trial and appeal.

Clark has a reputation for developing winning legal strategies rooted in a deep command of technically challenging subject matter. He regularly manages discovery and claim construction efforts, drafts dispositive and case-shaping motions, takes and defends key expert and fact depositions, and presents oral argument. Clark has played critical roles in matters resulting in settlements and licenses totaling well in excess of nine figures.

Clark holds a master’s degree in engineering mechanics from Columbia University, and his experience spans a wide range of technologies, including computer hardware and software, display devices, standard essential technology (e.g., video, Wi-Fi, memory), networking systems, medical devices, and aerospace systems, among many other technologies.

Clark is also the president of the Orange County Intellectual Property Law Association. Prior to joining Fabricant Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP, he was counsel at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, where he focused on patent litigation.

Representative Experience
- Represents WeCrevention, Inc. in a multi-defendant patent enforcement campaign asserting patents relating to memory technology against major consumer electronics companies including Apple Inc., Dell Inc., and Lenovo Group Limited. WeCrevention, Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 7:25-cv-00458 (W.D. Tex.); WeCrevention, Inc. v. Dell Inc. et al., No. 2:25-cv-01040 (E.D. Tex.); WeCrevention Inc. v. Lenovo Group Limited et al., No. 2:25-cv-01008 (E.D. Tex.)
- Represents MR Licensing, LLC in a multi-defendant patent enforcement campaign asserting patents relating to semiconductor and memory technology against major technology companies including Renesas Electronics Corporation, Seagate Technology Holdings, and Texas Instruments, Inc. MR Licensing, LLC v. Renesas Electronics Corporation, No. 2:26-cv-00032 (E.D. Tex.); MR Licensing LLC v. Renesas Electronics Corporation et al., No. 2:24-cv-00238 (E.D. Tex.); MR Licensing LLC v. Seagate Technology Holdings plc et al., No. 2:25-cv-00596 (E.D. Tex.); MR Licensing LLC v. Texas Instruments, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-00899 (E.D. Tex.)
- Represents Enhanced Data Streaming LLC in patent infringement litigation against Cisco Systems, Inc. asserting patents relating to networking technology. Enhanced Data Streaming LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-01038 (E.D. Tex.)
- Represents Smart Speaker LLC in patent infringement litigation against Amazon.com Services LLC and in related IPR proceedings. Smart Speaker LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC, No. 2:25-cv-00707 (E.D. Tex.)
- Represented Correct Transmission, LLC in patent infringement litigation against Juniper Networks, Inc. asserting patents relating to networking technology. Correct Transmission, LLC v. Juniper Networks, Inc., No. 3:21-cv-00384 (N.D. Cal.)
- Represented Shenzhen Smoore Technology Co., Ltd., one of the world’s largest manufacturers of vaporization technology, in patent infringement litigation against Greentank Technologies Corp. Shenzhen Smoore Technology Co., Ltd. v. Greentank Technologies Corp., No. 2:22-cv-07638 (C.D. Cal.)
- Represented Butterfly Network, Inc. in patent infringement action against FUJIFILM Sonosite, Inc. and in related IPR proceedings. FUJIFILM Sonosite, Inc. v. Butterfly Network, Inc., No. 1:22-cv-00309 (D. Del.)
- Represented Kingston Technology Company, Inc., a leading manufacturer of memory and storage products, in patent litigation against Better Mouse Company, LLC. Better Mouse Company, LLC v. Kingston Technology Company, Inc., No. 8:20-cv-02166 (C.D. Cal.)
- Represented Inguran, LLC d/b/a STGenetics in patent infringement litigation against ABS Global, Inc. involving animal genetics and reproductive technology and in related IPR proceedings. Inguran, LLC et al. v. ABS Global, Inc. et al., No. 3:20-cv-00349 (W.D. Wis.)
- Represented XY, LLC and related entities in patent infringement litigation against Trans Ova Genetics, LC in the District of Colorado involving animal reproductive and genetics technology. XY, LLC et al. v. Trans Ova Genetics, LC, No. 1:17-cv-00944 (D. Colo.)
- Represented VIZIO, Inc. in the Central District of California in a patent infringement action brought by Innovative Foundry Technologies LLC. Innovative Foundry Technologies LLC v. VIZIO, Inc., No. 8:19-cv-00301 (C.D. Cal.)
- Represented VIZIO, Inc. in a patent infringement action brought by Nichia Corporation involving LED technology, and in related IPR proceedings. Nichia Corporation v. VIZIO, Inc., No. 8:18-cv-00362 (C.D. Cal.)
- Represented VIZIO, Inc. in a patent infringement action brought by Broadcom Corporation involving video processing and display technology. Broadcom Corporation v. VIZIO, Inc., No. 8:17-cv-00408 (C.D. Cal.)
- Represented Apricorn, Inc. in patent infringement litigation against MAZ Encryption Technologies LLC involving data encryption technology. MAZ Encryption Technologies LLC v. Apricorn, Inc., No. 3:16-cv-01153 (S.D. Cal.)
- Represented IngenioSpec, LLC in two Section 337 investigations asserting patents covering electronic eyewear products. Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1423); Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses (II) (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1455)
- Represented Aardvark Medical Inc. in a Section 337 investigation asserting patents covering nasal device technology. Certain Nasal Devices and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1444)
- Represented VIZIO, Inc. in a Section 337 investigation involving patents relating to smart television technology. Certain Smart Televisions (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1338)
- Represented VIZIO, Inc. in a Section 337 investigation involving patents relating to semiconductor fabrication and packaging technology. Certain Semiconductor Devices, Integrated Circuits, and Consumer Products Containing the Same (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1149)
- Represented VIZIO, Inc. in a Section 337 investigation involving patents relating to semiconductor and graphics processing technology. Semiconductor Devices and Consumer Audiovisual Products Containing the Same (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1047); Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Consumer Products Containing the Same (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1044)
Bar & Court Admissions
- California
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- U.S. District Court, Central District of California
- U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
- U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
- U.S. District Court, Colorado District Court
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas
- U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas
- U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin

Education
- University of San Diego School of Law, J.D., 2015
- Columbia University, M.S., Engineering Mechanics, 2011
- Occidental College, B.A., Physics, 2010

News & Insights

March 24, 2026

FRL Ranked Extensively in 2026 Patexia ITC Intelligence Report

https://frlip.com/wp-content/themes/impeka/images/empty/thumbnail.jpg
150
150

Fabricant Rubino Lambrianakos LLP

Fabricant Rubino Lambrianakos LLP

https://frlip.com/wp-content/themes/impeka/images/empty/thumbnail.jpg

March 24, 2026
March 24, 2026

New York

New Jersey

Washington, DC

California

Clark Gordon

Counsel

Clark Gordon

Counsel

Connect With Me:

New York

New Jersey

Washington, DC

California