- People
- Offices
- Capabilities
back- Capabilities
- Corporate, Finance and Investments
- back
- Corporate, Finance and Investments
- Overview
- Activist Defense
- Alternative Capital and Credit Funds
- Capital Markets
- Construction and Procurement
- Corporate Governance
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Energy and Infrastructure Projects
- Financial Restructuring
- Investment Funds and Asset Management
- Leveraged Finance
- Mergers and Acquisitions
- Middle East and Islamic Finance and Investment
- Private Equity
- Real Estate
- Securitization
- Tax
- Technology and Emerging Companies
- Government Matters
- Trial and Global Disputes
- back
- Trial and Global Disputes
- Overview
- Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law
- Bankruptcy and Insolvency Litigation
- Class Action Defense
- Commercial Litigation
- Construction and Engineering Disputes
- Corporate and Securities Litigation
- E-Discovery
- Insurance Coverage and Recovery
- Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark and Copyright Litigation
- International Arbitration and Litigation
- Labor and Employment
- Product Liability
- Professional Liability
- Toxic & Environmental Torts
- Industries
- Careers
- News & Insights
- About
- Languages
People
Britton
Davis
(Brit)
Counsel
Trial and Global Disputes
/ Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark and Copyright Litigation
Denver: +1 720 535 2311
bfdavis@kslaw.com
Brit is a trial attorney who focuses on patent disputes in high-stakes litigation involving complex technologies in US district court and before the PTAB.
Brit has experience in all phases of patent litigation on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants, from initial diligence investigations, through trial and appeals. Brit has been trial counsel to companies in cases where hundreds of millions of dollars were at stake. He has argued claim construction motions, evidentiary motions, JMOL motions, and discovery motions in district court and before the PTAB. Brit played a key role in helping to secure rare complete patent owner wins in two inter partes review proceedings on all claims under review.
Brit also has experience with trademark litigation, trade secret litigation, securities fraud class actions, ERISA class actions, FACTA class actions, and corporate derivative actions, as well as experience representing clients in connection with governmental investigations and various commercial matters.
Prior to beginning his legal career, Brit worked as an engineer for Veeco Instruments Inc., in the Metrology & Instrumentation Group. At Veeco, Brit designed, built, and implemented new products and product improvements in Veeco's research-focused line of atomic force microscopes. Brit's product design experience covers mechanical, optical, and electrical systems; programmable semiconductor devices; and design for manufacturability and cost reduction.
Credentials
J.D., The University of Texas School of Law, honors
B.S.M.E., University of California-Santa Barbara, high honors
Colorado
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Washington
American Bar Association
Colorado Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section
PTAB Bar Association, Conference Committee
Pi Tau Sigma, National Mechanical Engineering Honor Society
Tau Beta Pi, National Engineering Honor Society
Washington State Bar Association, Litigation and Intellectual Property Section
Matters
Cisco v. Focal IP — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving VoIP and web-based calling features. All challenged claims were found unpatentable by the PTAB on final written decision.
Open Text v. Box.com, et al. — Trial counsel for Open Text in competitor-on-competitor case involving involving cloud based data storage and document management software. The jury found Box infringed all claims.
Cisco v. Vir2us — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving antivirus software, operating systems, and virtual machines. Case settled shortly after IPRs were filed.
See more
Close
Matters
Cisco v. Focal IP — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving VoIP and web-based calling features. All challenged claims were found unpatentable by the PTAB on final written decision.
Open Text v. Box.com, et al. — Trial counsel for Open Text in competitor-on-competitor case involving involving cloud based data storage and document management software. The jury found Box infringed all claims.
Cisco v. Vir2us — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving antivirus software, operating systems, and virtual machines. Case settled shortly after IPRs were filed.
Open Text v. Alfresco Software — Litigation counsel for Open Text in competitor-on-competitor case involving cloud based data storage and document management software. Case settled before trial.
Patent Asset Licensing v. Bright House Networks - Litigation and IPR counsel for Bright House Networks in case involving VoIP and web-based calling features. Case was stayed pending IPRs. All challenged claims were found unpatentable in IPR.
SportBrain v. Fitbit — Litigation counsel for Fitbit in case involving web-based tracking of pedometers.
EMC v. ACQIS - IPR counsel for patent owner ACQIS in two IPRs filed by EMC on patents involving high-speed computer architecture. All instituted claims were upheld by the PTAB on final written decision.
Enfish v. Microsoft Corp., et al. - Litigation and appeal counsel for Enfish in case involving database software. Case settled after Enfish’s patents survived section 101 patentability challenges and IPR appeals at the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit's section 101 decision on Enfish's patents was a landmark decision on patentable subject matter.
Insights
Article · Source: IPWatchdog
February 26, 2018
Making Sense of the Federal Circuit's Damages Opinions in Exmark and Finjan
Article · Source: Law360
February 1, 2018
Claim Scope and Apportionment at Fed. Cir.
Article · Source: The Knowledge Group
August 1, 2017
Exploring the "Patent Agent Privilege" Proposal and Its Anticipated Impacts on PTAB Proceedings
Matters
Cisco v. Focal IP — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving VoIP and web-based calling features. All challenged claims were found unpatentable by the PTAB on final written decision.
Open Text v. Box.com, et al. — Trial counsel for Open Text in competitor-on-competitor case involving involving cloud based data storage and document management software. The jury found Box infringed all claims.
Cisco v. Vir2us — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving antivirus software, operating systems, and virtual machines. Case settled shortly after IPRs were filed.
See more
Close
Matters
Cisco v. Focal IP — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving VoIP and web-based calling features. All challenged claims were found unpatentable by the PTAB on final written decision.
Open Text v. Box.com, et al. — Trial counsel for Open Text in competitor-on-competitor case involving involving cloud based data storage and document management software. The jury found Box infringed all claims.
Cisco v. Vir2us — IPR counsel for Cisco in case involving antivirus software, operating systems, and virtual machines. Case settled shortly after IPRs were filed.
Open Text v. Alfresco Software — Litigation counsel for Open Text in competitor-on-competitor case involving cloud based data storage and document management software. Case settled before trial.
Patent Asset Licensing v. Bright House Networks - Litigation and IPR counsel for Bright House Networks in case involving VoIP and web-based calling features. Case was stayed pending IPRs. All challenged claims were found unpatentable in IPR.
SportBrain v. Fitbit — Litigation counsel for Fitbit in case involving web-based tracking of pedometers.
EMC v. ACQIS - IPR counsel for patent owner ACQIS in two IPRs filed by EMC on patents involving high-speed computer architecture. All instituted claims were upheld by the PTAB on final written decision.
Enfish v. Microsoft Corp., et al. - Litigation and appeal counsel for Enfish in case involving database software. Case settled after Enfish’s patents survived section 101 patentability challenges and IPR appeals at the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit's section 101 decision on Enfish's patents was a landmark decision on patentable subject matter.
Insights
Article · Source: IPWatchdog
February 26, 2018
Making Sense of the Federal Circuit's Damages Opinions in Exmark and Finjan
Article · Source: Law360
February 1, 2018
Claim Scope and Apportionment at Fed. Cir.
Article · Source: The Knowledge Group
August 1, 2017
Exploring the "Patent Agent Privilege" Proposal and Its Anticipated Impacts on PTAB Proceedings
Credentials
J.D., The University of Texas School of Law, honors
B.S.M.E., University of California-Santa Barbara, high honors
Colorado
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Washington
American Bar Association
Colorado Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section
PTAB Bar Association, Conference Committee
Pi Tau Sigma, National Mechanical Engineering Honor Society
Tau Beta Pi, National Engineering Honor Society
Washington State Bar Association, Litigation and Intellectual Property Section