Attorney Detail Banner
Back to Attorneys
Clark, Michelle A.

Michelle A. Clark

Direct Tel: +1 415-875-6340
San Francisco
Tel: +1 415 875 6600 Fax: +1 415 875 6700

Michelle Ann Clark is a partner in the firm’s San Francisco office.  Her practice focuses on technology-based litigation with an emphasis on patent, contract, and other commercial disputes.  Michelle has extensive experience with a variety of both software and hardware technologies including: microelectromechanical (MEMS) devices, semiconductor memory, power converters and regulators, digital signal processing, wireless Internet infrastructure, search engine services, network storage and security software, and other professional and entertainment software applications.  She has tried and litigated cases in state and federal courts throughout the country, as well as before the International Trade Commission.  Michelle received a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science and economics from the University of California, Berkeley and a J.D. from Northwestern University School of Law.  Following law school, she clerked for the Hon. Percy Anderson of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

  • Google
  • IBM
  • Mediatek
  • Samsung
  • SK Hynix
  • Sony
  • SoundHound
  • STMicroelectronics
  • Symantec
  • ViaSat
  • Zynga
  • Represented plaintiff ViaSat against defendants Space Systems/Loral (“SS/L”) and Loral Space & Communications in a complex patent and breach of contract lawsuit in the Southern District of California involving high-speed satellite technology capable of providing broadband services to consumers and businesses. ViaSat asserted that its patented and proprietary satellite technology was misappropriated by defendants to build a competing satellite, in violation of ViaSat’s patent rights and confidentiality agreements. After a three-week jury trial, obtained a jury verdict of $283 million for ViaSat. Jury found that SS/L infringed all asserted patent claims and breached its contractual obligations to ViaSat.
  • In a jury trial in the District of Delaware, obtained a complete defense verdict for Google and YouTube in a patent infringement action in which plaintiff Personalized User Model, LLC accused Google’s search, advertising, and YouTube systems of infringing two patents relating to personalization services. The jury found all claims not infringed, and the patents invalid as anticipated and obvious. Jury further found that one of the named inventors breached his employment agreement with his prior employer (whose rights Google had purchased) by failing to assign the inventions to that employer.
  • Represented plaintiff STMicroelectronics as trial counsel against its competitor, InvenSense, in multiple patent lawsuits at the ITC, the Northern District of California and the Eastern District of Texas. Asserted twelve different patents against InvenSense, and defended against five InvenSense patents, related to various design and manufacturing technologies for MEMS-based gyroscopes and accelerometers used in smartphones, tablets and other devices. After obtaining claim construction victories at the ITC, and after securing a transfer of the ED Texas case brought by InvenSense to the ND California, the litigation settled after one day of trial at the ITC, resulting in a successful patent license royalty agreement for STMicroelectronics.
  • Represented respondents Broadcom, NVIDIA, STMicroelectronics, MediaTek, Freescale, Cisco, and Motorola as trial counsel in an ITC investigation (337-TA-753) initiated by Rambus involving six patents covering memory controller and chip-to-chip interface technologies. Staff attorney recommended no violation for all patents. Obtained a complete defense victory. The ITC Commission issued a final determination of no violation for all patents based on invalidity and unenforceability due to willful spoliation of evidence. Tens of billions of dollars in product sales were at risk and ultimately protected as a result of this victory.
  • Represented respondent Sony in an ITC Investigation regarding ultra-high resolution digital projectors, including those used to show 3-D movies in theaters throughout the country. During the Investigation, we secured important wins on Sony’s motions, including a motion to strike critical contentions (and evidence) regarding the asserted patent’s invention date and domestic industry. Just two weeks before trial and for nothing in return, Complainants requested that the Investigation be terminated in its entirety.
    Represented IBM in a patent infringement suit concerning blade server computer systems.
  • Northwestern University
    (J.D., Order of the Coif, 2005)
    • Dean's List
    • Northwestern University Law Review:
      • Note and Comment Editor, 2004-2005
  • University of California Berkeley
    (B.A., Political Science and Economics, 2001) 
  • The State Bar of California
  • United States District Court:
    • Northern District of California
    • Central District of California
    • Southern District of California
    • Eastern District of Texas
  • O'Melveny & Meyers, LLP:
    • Associate, 2007-2010
  • Law Clerk to the Hon. Percy Anderson:
    • United States District Court for the Central District of California, 2005-2007