Jeffrey B. Plies
Partner | Austin
Jeffrey B. Plies

Jeffrey B. Plies, co-chair of Dechert's Intellectual Property group, represents technology and medical device companies in patent litigation. As a former engineer for the U.S. Air Force Electronics Systems Center, the U.S. Army Materials Technology Laboratory, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and the MITRE Corporation, Mr. Plies’ diverse technical expertise includes direct working experience with technologies such as global positioning system, radar, and satellite communications, UHF/VHF/HF communications, missile guidance, aircraft avionics (e.g., FMS, INS, ILS, EFIS, TCAS, and IFF), heavy armor systems, rapid solidification, and aerospace alloy development.

Mr. Plies represents plaintiffs and defendants in patent litigation throughout the United States. Recently, he has represented clients in patent disputes involving medical devices (artificial heart valves, annuloplasty rings, and drug eluting coronary stents), video compression (MPEG), error correction algorithms for data storage devices, telephony modems, computer graphics, speech compression, computer I/O busses, IEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi, processing and scaling of TV video signals, flexible manufacturing/assembly systems, and Display Data Channel Command Interfaces (DDC/CI) for computer monitors.

Mr. Plies is routinely recognized by The Legal 500 US for Intellectual Property: Patents: Litigation (2020-2023). Mr. Plies was recognized as a leading Intellectual Property lawyer by The Best Lawyers in America in 2017.

  • Intellectual Ventures v. AT&T, Inc. et al. (W.D. Tex.). Represented Intellectual Ventures in patent infringement case involving 19 patents relating to digital subscriber line (DSL) technologies such as discrete multi-tone (DMT), bit swap, and seamless rate adaptation (SRA) as implemented in AT&T’s ADLS2/VDSL2 consumer modems and DSLAM’s. Case settled on favorable terms before trial.
  • Intellectual Ventures v. AT&T, Inc. et al. (D. Del.). Represented Intellectual Ventures in patent infringement case that included five patents pertaining to 802.11 Wi-Fi technologies. Case settled on favorable terms.
  • Mondis Technology Ltd. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (D.N.J.). Represented Mondis in case against LG’s digital televisions that implement HDMI and VESA plug-and-play technology.  Obtained US$45M jury verdict.
  • Red Rock Analytics, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.). Defended Samsung against allegations that the RF transceivers in its mobile phones infringed a patent relating to quadrature calibration. Case settled after expert discovery and prior to trial. 
  • Mondis Technology Ltd. v. LG Electronics, et al. (E.D. Tex.). Represented Mondis in an eight patent case relating to computer monitor DDC/CI digital interfaces and Extended Display Identification Data (EDID) capabilities. Secured jury verdict for Mondis that the asserted patents were valid and infringed.
  • Hitachi-Maxell, Ltd. v. Top Victory Elec., Co. Ltd., et al. (E.D. Tex.). Represented Hitachi in enforcing patents relating to video signal processing, digital television systems-on-a-chip (SOC), and high-definition television.
  • Lucent Technologies, Inc., et al. v. Gateway, Inc., et al. (S.D. Cal.). Defended Gateway in 15-patent suit involving MPEG video coding, caller-ID, low bit-rate speech coders, and other computer-related technologies. Settled after winning key summary judgment motions.
  • Multimedia Patent Trust v. Microsoft Corp., et al. (S.D. Cal.). Defended Gateway against three patents relating to MPEG-2 and H.264 video coding. Settled.
  • Amiga Development LLC. v. Hewlett Packard Co. (E.D. Tex.). Represented Amiga in a two patent case relating to computer video graphics and Reed-Solomon error correction algorithms employed in optical disc drives. Settled.
  • In re: Rembrandt Technologies Patent Litigation (D. Del.). Defended Fox Broadcasting in multi-district litigation involving patents directed at trellis and convolutional coding of digital television signals. Case dismissed following entry of summary judgment of non-infringement; affirmed by Federal Circuit.
  • Secure Axcess, LLC v. Dell Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.). Defended Citigroup against patents relating to web server that employ encrypted cookies to facilitate secure account access. Dismissed by plaintiff.
  • In Re: Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. (W.D. Pa.). Defended Citigroup against four patents pertaining to secure data communications between mobile phones and web servers. Settled.
  • Linex Technologies, Inc. v. Belkin, et al. (E.D. Tex.). Represented Lenovo and Gateway in patent case concerning IEEE 802.11n WiFi technology. Settled.
  • Stambler v. Intuit Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex.). Defended Vanguard Group against patents relating to secure financial transfers and communications between a web site and web server using secure sockets layer (SSL) and transport layer security (TLS) protocols. Settled.
  • Synchrome Technology Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co. et al. (E.D. Tex.). Defended both Gateway and Lenovo against two patents relating to computer storage device interfaces. Settled.
  • Career Destination Development, LLC v. Monster Worldwide, Inc. (D. Kan.). Defended Monster against two patents relating to database searching and matching algorithms and web site operations. Dismissed by plaintiff after Monster filed successful Covered Business Method (CBM) review petitions with the U.S. Patent Office.
  • Orion IP, LLC v. Nike Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.). Defended Gateway and eMachines in a two patent case involving the operation of the companies’ websites. Settled.
  • Abstrax, Inc. v. Dell, et al. (E.D. Tex.). Represented Gateway as defendant in patent suit relating to automated manufacturing methods. The complaint against Gateway was dismissed.
  • Quantum World Corp. v. Atmel Corp. et al. (E.D. Tex.). Defended Lenovo against two patents relating to Trusted Platform Modules and random number generators. Settled.
  • Anthurium Solutions Inc. v. Medquist, Inc. (E.D. Tex.). Defended Medquist in patent case relating to medical transcription services and workflow management systems. Settled.
  • Medtronic, Inc. v. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. (N.D. Cal.). Represented Medtronic in a multi-patent infringement dispute involving the material properties and structures relating to accused stent medical device products. Settled.
  • Edwards Lifesciences v. St. Jude Medical (C.D. Cal.). Represented Edwards in patent litigation concerning artificial heart valves and annuloplasty rings. Settled.
  • Edwards Lifesciences v. Carbomedics (D. Del.). Represented Edwards in patent litigation involving annuloplasty ring delivery systems. Settled.
Services Industries
    • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), B.S., Mechanical Engineering, 1991
    • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), M.S., Materials Science, 1993
    • The University of Texas School of Law, J.D., 2000, Order of the Coif
    • Texas
    • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
    • United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
    • United States District Court for the Western District of Texas
    • United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
    • United States Patent and Trademark Office