Mr. Desai has had significant roles in both jury and bench trials, including direct and cross-examination of key witnesses, presenting at Markman hearings, and arguing both discovery and case-dispositive motions. His representations have covered a wide array of industries including wind and gas turbine, medical device, chemical, biopharma, consumer electronics, semiconductor, and computer networking.
In 2018, Mr. Desai was again recognized by Legal 500 as a recommended lawyer for Patent Litigation, and in earlier editions he was recommended for his appellate work. He also is named among The World’s Leading Patent Professionals for Patent Litigation in New York by IAM Patent 1000, and recognized on Benchmark Litigation’s 2018 “40 & Under Hot List.” In 2014, Mr. Desai was identified as a Rising Star for Intellectual Property Litigation by DC Super Lawyers.
Recent cases that Mr. Desai has been involved with include:
- General Electric Company v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (N.D. Tex. and M.D. Fl.) – Counsel for GE in infringement actions relating to wind turbines that resulted in a $170 million judgment for GE, and summary judgment of non-infringement for GE on the patent asserted by Mitsubishi.
- Counsel for General Electric, BASF, Apple, The Dow Chemical Company, Under Armour, and Nu Mark in over 50 IPR proceedings involving turbofan engines, zeolite catalysts, smartphone and wearable technology, OLED compounds, and e-vapor products.
- adidas AG v. Under Armour, Inc. (D. Del.) – Counsel for Under Armour in a district court case brought by adidas accusing Under Armour of infringing 13 patents related to wearable technology and mobile fitness applications.
- Akzo Nobel Coatings Inc. v. The Dow Chemical Company (Del. Ch.) – Counsel for Dow in a breach of contract litigation relating to ownership of patent applications relating to polymers and coating formulations.
- Highland Dwellings Together We Stand Legal Action Group v. District of Columbia Housing Authority – Pro bono counsel for public housing tenants in a litigation against DCHA. Successfully argued a motion for remand before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.