Andy Liddell is a technology lawyer with a focus on intellectual property matters, including patent litigation, trademark litigation, and patent prosecution and portfolio counseling. His patent litigation experience includes representing accused patent infringers in federal district court and before the International Trade Commission, as well as assisting patent owners in asserting their patents against their competitors. Andy is particularly interested patent damages issues, helping clients understand the scope of their potential exposure or recovery early in a case for the purposes of strategic decisionmaking.
Recently, Andy favorably settled a long-running dispute on behalf of a patent owner against a competitor that had launched a competing offshore drilling product. Earlier in that case, he persuaded the Court to adopt all of the patent owner's proposed claim constructions, with the Court issuing its claim construction order the same day as the hearing. In another recent case, Andy successfully dismissed a declaratory judgment suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Andy is also experienced in trademark litigation, having represented clients in federal district court as well as in opposition proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Additionally, Andy has prosecuted utility and design patents involving a wide range of innovative technologies, including drilling equipment, gene-sequencing microarrays, surgical instruments, wound therapy devices, semiconducting materials, home exercise equipment, construction tools, and pest control devices. Andy has also counseled companies on their intellectual property strategies and has worked with clients to develop internal policies and procedures to encourage and protect innovation.
JD, with honors, University of Texas School of Law, 2009
BS, magna cum laude, Texas A&M University, 2006
Andy is admitted to practice law in Texas and is a registered patent attorney.
- Texas State Bar
- US Patent & Trademark Attorney
Rankings and recognitions
- Texas Rising Star, intellectual property litigation, Thomson Reuters, 2014-2018
- "New PTAB Rules Take Effect May 2, 2016," Patent Challenges, April 28, 2016
- "Federal Circuit rules that PTAB has full discretion to deny request to file motion for supplemental information," Patent Challenges, March 8, 2016
- "Federal Circuit holds that PTAB is not bound by findings made in Institution Decisions", Patent Challenges, February 12, 2016
- "Federal Circuit rules it has no interlocutory jurisdiction on denial of motion to stay until CBM Review is instituted," Patent Challenges, May 5, 2015
- "An emerging norm: no stay until PTAB grants IPR petition," Patent Challenges, March 27, 2015
- "Using Design Patents to Bridge the Gap in a Package Redesign," The Brand Protection Blog, September 18, 2012
Reps Propose 'Loser Pays' for Long-Shot Patent Suits," The Brand Protection Blog, September 4, 2012
- "Reps Propose 'Loser Pays' for Long-Shot Patent Suits," The Brand Protection Blog, August 23, 2012
- "EU's Highest Court Allows Extended Patent Protection for New Medical Uses of Known Products," The Brand Protection Blog, August 14, 2012
- "Trending Topic: Twitter's 'Innovator's Patent Agreement,'" Law360, May 15, 2012
"DIY IP: Protect Yo Self, Don't Wreck Yo Self," South By Southwest Interactive, March 12, 2013
Memberships and activities
- Intellectual Property Owners Association, Damages Subcommittee
- Austin Intellectual Property Law Association
- Texas Bar Association
- Austin Young Lawyers Association
n Monday, the Supreme Court overruled the Federal Circuit's strict framework for enhancing damages in a patent infringement action. Now, a district court may use its discretion in increasing damages up to three times actual damages, reviewable for an abuse of discretion..
June 16, 2016