Skip to main content

Philip C. Ducker

Of Counsel

[email protected]



Philip’s practice is primarily focused on intellectual property matters with an emphasis on patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and trade dress. These matters involve a wide and diverse range of complex technologies, including electronics, mobile telecommunications, mobile devices, and medical devices. Philip has successfully represented clients in District Courts across the United States and before the US International Trade. In addition to litigation matters, Philip also regularly counsels clients on intellectual property acquisitions and divestitures.

Previously, Philip worked as an associate in the Silicon Valley office of an international law firm.


  • Boston University School of Law (JD)
  • University of Cincinnati (BS)


International Trade Commission

  • Certain Food Waste Disposers and Components and Packaging Thereof (337-TA-838) - Trial counsel for respondent Anaheim Manufacturing in unusual Section 337 investigation involving patents, trademarks, and trade dress regarding garbage disposers. Won complete victory when the complainant unconditionally dropped all claims following the first day of trial.
  • Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (337-TA-692) - Trial counsel for respondent Samsung Electro Mechanical Co., Ltd. in a Section 337 case relating to multilayer ceramic capacitors. Prevailed on all three patents asserted at trial.

Federal District Court

  • Intellectual Ventures I and II v. AT&T, Sprint Nextel, T-Mobile and US Cellular. Lead counsel in two cases involving 28 patents related to various aspects of telecommunications services including LTE and 3G infrastructure, SMS messaging, MMS messaging, web-based services and directory assistance technology.

Recent Insights

News & Press


Viewpoint Thumbnail

Another One Bites the Dust – N.D. Tex. Dismisses Antitrust Claims re FRAND Commitments with Prejudice

September 17, 2020 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, Joseph Miller, Adrian Kwan, Philip C. Ducker

In the latest decision addressing antitrust liability for FRAND commitments, Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn of the Northern District of Texas dismissed a complaint from Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. (“Continental”) alleging, inter alia, violations of §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, and declaratory judgment as to FRAND obligations against Avanci, LLC (“Avanci”) and various members of its patent pool (collectively, “Defendants”).
Read more
Intellectual Property Viewpoints Thumbnail

The Federal Circuit Broadens Application of the Kessler Doctrine

June 23, 2020 | Blog | By Matthew Hurley, Philip C. Ducker, Adrian Kwan

Last week, the Federal Circuit invoked the Kessler doctrine in ruling that a district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s patent infringement suit against Amazon barred the plaintiff’s subsequent lawsuits against Amazon and its customers in In Re PersonalWeb Technologies, Inc.
Read more
Intellectual Property Viewpoints Thumbnail
Mintz is recognized as among the top ten firms in ITC Section 337 litigation by Patexia in its inaugural "ITC Intelligence Report". We are pleased to be among the firms included in this publication and thrilled that it has come on the heels of a great year at the ITC for the Mintz team.
Read more
Viewpoint Thumbnail
On February 25, 2019, the Supreme Court denied Power Integrations, Inc.’s (“Power Integrations”) petition for writ of certiorari.  The question presented to the Court was whether a plaintiff who had proven customer demand for an infringing product as a result of the patented feature was entitled to damages based on the entire market value of the product, or if the plaintiff also had to prove that the other unpatented features of the infringing product did not drive customer demand.  The Court’s denial leaves a high burden for patentee’s relying on the Entire Market Value Rule (“EMVR”).
Read more
Viewpoint Thumbnail

CAFC Affirms Prior Jury Verdict Admissible in Upholding $140M Verdict against Time Warner

December 17, 2018 | Blog | By Philip C. Ducker, Adrian Kwan

On November 30, 2018, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict awarding Sprint Communications Company, LP (“Sprint”) damages in the amount of $139,800,000.00 USD against Time Warner Cable, Inc., et al., for infringing five patents directed to Voice over IP technology (“VoIP”).
Read more
On January 12, 2018 in Exmark Manufacturing Co. Inc., v. Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLC, the Federal Circuit once again addressed the issue of apportioning damages, an area of the law that continues to evolve.  The parties in Exmark are competitors in the commercial lawn mower market.
Read more
The Federal Circuit’s damages apportionment jurisprudence is an ever-evolving area of the law. On January 10, 2018, a three judge panel of the Federal Circuit revisited the issue in connection with a patent covering a method for providing computer security in the case Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc.
Read more

News & Press

In this Law360 “Expert Analysis” column, a team of Mintz intellectual property attorneys discuss the Federal Circuit’s modified opinion in Power Integrations v. Fairchild. The piece notes that this opinion is a retreat from an earlier ruling that set an unattainable standard for invoking the entire market value rule. The column is authored by Member Steve Akerley, Of Counsel Philip Ducker and Associate Rob Moore.



IP Law & Management Institute: Leveraging and Protecting your IP Assets to Thrive in a Dynamic Corporate Environment

International Performance Management Institute

The Langham Huntington, 1401 S Oak Knoll Ave, Pasadena, CA