Miranda Jones

[ partner ]

Miranda Jones

Miranda specializes in patent litigation and patent-related antitrust litigation. She has handled litigation matters in a variety of technologies, including the pharmaceutical, chemical, electrical and mechanical fields.

Miranda has handled cases in federal courts in Texas, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Georgia, and Washington D.C. In addition to her trial and litigation practice, she has been involved in appeals before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Prior to joining HPC, Miranda served as a judicial law clerk to Judge Pauline Newman at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

While at George Mason University School of Law, she served as Articles Editor of the George Mason Law Review and as a Symposium Executive Editor for the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. She was awarded the Adrian Fischer Award for Legal Research and Writing for her article, Permanent Injunction, a Remedy by Any Other Name Is Patently Not the Same: How eBay v. MercExchange Affects the Patent Right of Non-Practicing Entities, 14 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 1035 (2007). In 2008, Miranda was selected to receive the Burton Award for Legal Achievement, a national award for legal writing.

Supreme Court Experience

  • Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 13-0896 (U.S.): Supreme Court counsel for Commil in appeal involving induced infringement. Read the Opinion.
  • Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, No. 15-0446 (U.S.): Supreme Court counsel for Amicus Law Professors in Support of Petitioner.
  • Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International,Inc. No. 15-1189 (U.S.): Submitted amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of law professors.

Appellate Court Experience

  • Rembrandt Wireless v. Samsung Electronics, No. 16-1729: Appellate counsel for Rembrandt in challenge of $16.9 million patent infringement verdict against Samsung.
  • CSIRO v. Cisco, No. 15-1066 (Fed. Cir.): Appellate counsel for CSIRO in appeal involving patent litigation.
  • Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 12-1042 (Fed. Cir.): Appellate counsel for Commil in appeal involving patent litigation.
  • Better Bags, Inc. v. Redi Bag USA, LLC, No. 13-1064 (Fed. Cir.): Appellate counsel for Better Bags in an appeal involving patent infringement; obtained a Rule 36 affirmance in favor of Better Bags. Read the Opinion.
  • Rochester Drug Co-Operative Inc., et al. v. Braintree Laboratories, No. 11-1539 (Fed. Cir.): Class counsel for an appeal involving an injunction.

Inter Partes Review (IPR) Experience

  • LG Elecs., et al. v. Rosetta Wireless Corp., on IPR No. 2016-01516:: Lead counsel for the patent owner (Rosetta) in IPR proceedings. Obtained a denial of institution of IPR on behalf of the patent owner.

Trial Court Experience

  • In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation, 14-md-02521 (N.D. Cal.): Class counsel representing direct purchasers in antitrust multidistrict litigation against Endo Pharmaceuticals over delays in the generic version of the drug.
  • In re Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation, 14-md-02516 (D. Conn.): Class counsel representing purchasers alleging that Boehringer Ingelheim unlawfully paid to delay entry of a generic version of the Aggrenox blood-clot medication.
  • Red Rock Analytics, LLC v. Samsung Elecs. Co. et al., 2:17-cv-00101 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for Red Rock Analytics in patent infringement litigation against Samsung Elecs.
  • Broadcom v. CSIRO, No. 6:09-cv-00513 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • CSIRO v. Lenovo, et al., No. 6:09-cv-00399 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • CSIRO v. Cisco, No. 6:11-cv-00343 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • CSIRO v. MediaTek, No. 6:12-cv-00578 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • MicroUnity Systems Engineering Inc. v. Acer et al., No. 2:10-cv-00091 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for MicroUnity in litigation for patent infringement of MicroUnity’s Media Processor patent portfolio.
  • Rembrandt Wireless Technologies IP v. Samsung Electronics Co., et al., No. 2:13-cv-00213 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for Rembrandt in litigation for patent infringement involving Bluetooth technology.
  • King Drug Co. of Florence, Inc., et al. v. Cephalon, Inc. et al., No. 2:06-cv-01797 (E.D. Pa.): Class counsel for Direct Purchaser Plaintiff class in an antitrust class action stemming from an innovator drug company’s assertion of a patent related to modafinil.
  • Rochester Drug Co-Operative Inc., et al. v. Braintree Laboratories Inc., No. 1:07-cv-00142 (D. Del.): Class counsel for litigation of an antitrust action stemming from an innovator drug company’s assertion of a patent related to polyethylene glycol.
  • Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co. Inc. v. Unimed Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., No. 1:09-cv-00957 (N.D. Ga.): Class counsel for litigation of an antitrust action stemming from an innovator drug company’s assertion of a patent related to a testosterone gel.