professionalIMG

Matthew A. Karambelas

Associate vCard


Education

  • Boston College (JD)
  • Boston College (BA, Mathematics, Political Science)

Bar Admissions

  • Massachusetts

Matthew practices with the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation group, serving clients presenting a diverse range of subject matter and technologies in both the International Trade Commission and United States District Courts. Matthew’s experience is focused on patent litigation, and also includes a wide variety of intellectual property diligence matters.

During law school, prior to serving as a Summer Associate in the firm’s IP Litigation Practice, Matthew worked as a Massachusetts Superior Court intern at the Essex County District Attorney’s Office. In that role, he conducted research and wrote memoranda on legal issues in criminal cases in addition to second-seating and supporting assistant district attorneys during trial. During his third year of law school, Matthew served a judicial intern for the Hon. Dennis J. Curran of the Massachusetts Superior Court. In that role, he assisted the management of both the judge’s civil session and pilot program on the effectiveness of mediation.

Representative Matters

  • Certain Communications or Computing Devices and Components Thereof (337-TA-925) Represented owner of portfolio of communications and computing patents from former enterprise communications business unit of large multinational innovation company. An ITC investigation was instituted in August 2014 as to respondent entities Apple, Samsung Electronics, LG Electronics and HTC Corporation. Google participated as an intervenor. The investigation resolved prior to evidentiary hearing in June of 2015.
  • Certain Consumer Electronics with Display and Processing Capabilities (337-TA-884) Represented owners of the patent portfolio of the original Silicon Graphics, now known as Graphics Properties Holdings, as complainant in the ITC. Investigation was instituted in June 2013 and among the respondent entities were Panasonic, Toshiba, Vizio, and ZTE. Most respondents settled. After an evidentiary hearing held over several days in May 2014, on August 29, 2014 Mintz Levin successfully obtained a recommendation for a Limited Exclusion Order against the remaining respondent, which chose to settle while Commission review of the Administrative Law Judge’s Initial Determination was pending.