• vcard
  • Education
    • J.D., University of California, Hastings College of the Law, 1996, Hastings International & Comparative Law Review, Articles Editor
    • M.S., University of California-Los Angeles, 1991, Computer Science
    • B.S., cum laude, University of Pennsylvania, 1990, Computer Science
  • Bar Jurisdictions
    • California, 1996
    • Admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, 1997
  • Court Admissions
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
    • U.S. District Court, Central District of California
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
    • U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
    • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas
Fabio Marino is an experienced intellectual property trial lawyer who serves as Vice Chair of the firm's Intellectual Property department, as well as practice chair for the Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation group. He also leads the firm's Silicon Valley office in his capacity as Office Managing Partner. Fabio tries high-stakes patent, trade secrets, and copyright cases across the United States, with an emphasis on computer-related technologies and arguing appeals at the Federal Circuit. 

He has experience in a variety of technologies, including:
  • Computer networks
  • Telecommunications
  • Software engineering
  • E-commerce
  • Internet-related technologies
  • Computer architecture
  • Digital circuit design
  • Flash memory
  • DRAMs
  • Parallel computing
  • 3-D graphics and animation
  • Medical imaging
  • Artificial intelligence

Prior to becoming an attorney, Fabio earned his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in computer science and worked in the industry as a software architect. He currently teaches an Intellectual Property Litigation class at Santa Clara University’s School of Law and coaches University of California-Berkeley teams in the Giles S. Rich Patent Moot Court Competition.

  • Representing Lonati against Yexiao and its US based distributors in parallel patent infringement actions in the Western District of North Carolina and the Central District of California.  The Courts have entered final judgment and permanent injunctions against Yexiao distributors.
  • Representing MLC against Micron in a patent infringement action involving a patent on flash memory technology before Judge Illston in the Northern District of California. After conducting a Markman hearing, the Court construed the terms of the patent favorably to MLC. 
  • Represented Global++ against Niantic in a copyright infringement action before Judge Tigar in the Northern District of California.
  • Represented Radware against F5 in a patent infringement action involving four patents on computer networking technologies before Judge Jones in the Western District of Washington.  The case settled after Radware successfully petitioned to transfer the case to the Northern District of California.
  • Represented Golf Best Buy against Golf Taylor in a copyright and patent infringement action involving golf club designs before Judge Beeler in the Northern District of California. 
  • Represented Diablo against Netlist in a patent infringement action involving five patents on double data rate dual in-line memory module (DDR DIMM) technology before Judge Gonzales-Rogers in the Northern District of California. 
  • Represented Radware in a patent infringement action involving seven patents on computer networking technologies before Judge Whyte in the Northern District of California. After a three-week trial the jury returned a unanimous verdict for Radware and determined that F5’s infringement of Radware’s patents was willful. After trial, the Court entered judgment in favor of Radware for $6.9M and issued a permanent injunction against F5. The verdict was upheld on appeal by the Federal Circuit.
  • Represented Radware in a patent infringement action involving three patents on computer networking technologies before Judge Whyte in the Northern District of California; the case settled favorably after the court construed the claims and denied A10’s summary judgment motions of non-infringement and invalidity.
  • Represented Diablo against allegations of trade secrets, breach of contract and trademark infringement by Netlist in a case argued before Judge Gonzales-Rogers in the Northern District of California and involving 15 trade secrets regarding double data rate dual in-line memory module (DDR DIMM) technology and related breach of contract and trademark allegations; rather than awarding Netlist the $6.5 million in damages it had sought, the jury awarded nominal damages of $2 on the Lanham Act claims; the court subsequently lifted a ban on Diablo's sale of chips used in data storage products from SanDisk, IBM and others, saying the injunction was not justified.
  • Represented Brocade in a patent, copyright and trade secret infringement action that involved thirteen patents on load balancing and high-availability of networking devices, as well as trade secrets and copyright claims before Judge Grewal in the Northern District of California; after a three-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict awarding Brocade $112 million in compensatory, as well as punitive, damages against A10 and its CEO, Lee Chen and, after trial, the court issued permanent injunctions barring A10 from making, using or selling devices that infringed Brocade’s patents and trade secrets.
  • Jointly defended Brocade, Citrix and Barracuda in a patent infringement case involving three patents on computer networking technologies before Judge Stark in the District of Delaware; the case was dismissed with prejudice against all three clients before claim construction.
  • Defended Foundry and Brocade in a patent infringement case involving six patents on virtual local areas networks (VLANs) and related technologies brought by Enterasys before Judge Woodlock in the District of Massachusetts.
 
Related News