Talin Gordnia's practice involves commercial litigation, patent litigation and licensing disputes. She has extensive experience relating to claim construction and Markman hearings. Talin has represented clients in the media and communications, computer networking, semiconductor, medical device and biotechnology industries.
Talin is an active member of the firm's Hiring Committee, Diversity Committee and Women's Committee and speaks on topics relating to patent litigation, diversity and hiring.
Prior to law school, Talin was an intellectual property associate at Northrop Grumman, where she drafted patent applications and advised on technology development and patent portfolio management. Talin previously worked as an electrical engineer at Northrop Grumman.
- Koninklijke Philips N.V. et al. v. ZOLL Medical Corp. (D. Mass.). Representing ZOLL Medical Corp. in two cases in which ZOLL has been sued for patent infringement relating to external defibrillator technology. After Irell & Manella LLP took over the cases from other counsel in the wake of a loss on the liability phase in one of the two cases, ZOLL was able to persuade the court to stay the damages phase of that case, pending the parties’ cross appeals of the liability verdict, and then successfully negotiated a settlement of the other case.
- Juniper Networks v. Palo Alto Networks (D. Del). Represented Juniper Networks in patent litigation alleging that Palo Alto Networks products infringed a number of Juniper patents related to firewall and network security technologies. The patents at issue were invented by Palo Alto Networks’ founders when they had been Juniper employees. After a seven-day trial, resulting in a mistrial, Palo Alto Networks agreed to pay $175 million to resolve the patent litigation between the two network security companies pending in both California and Delaware.
- Motorola Mobility Inc. v. TiVo Inc./ TiVo Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc. (E.D. Texas). Represented TiVo in patent litigation over DVR technology against Motorola Mobility and Cisco Systems. On June 6, 2013, shortly before the start of trial, Motorola and Cisco agreed to pay $490 million to TiVo to resolve the litigation.
- TiVo v. Verizon (E.D. Texas). Represented TiVo in a patent infringement suit against Verizon accusing the company of infringing three of TiVo's DVR technology patents. In September 2012, shortly before trial was scheduled to begin, a settlement was reached in which Verizon agreed to provide TiVo with total compensation worth at least $250.4 million. As part of the settlement, TiVo and Verizon agreed to dismiss all pending litigation between the companies with prejudice. The parties also entered into a cross license of their respective patent portfolios in the advanced television field.
- TiVo v. AT&T (E.D. Texas). Represented TiVo in a suit against AT&T, alleging that AT&T's U-verse products and services infringed three of TiVo's patents covering DVR technology. In 2010, AT&T launched a counter-suit in California accusing TiVo DVRs of violating three AT&T patents. In January 2012, just days before a trial on TiVo's patents, AT&T agreed to pay TiVo a minimum of $215 million, plus additional fees in case AT&T's DVR subscriber base exceeds certain levels.
Honors & Awards
- Named to the Super Lawyers Rising Stars list (2016-2018)
- "A Look At Oral Arguments In Kimble V. Marvel," Law360 (April 2, 2015)
- "The Use of Experts in Patent Litigation: Recent Changes and Key Issues in Claim Construction," Practising Law Institute (PLI) Patent Litigation Course Handbook, Chapter 19 (September 2011)
- “Patent Litigation & Claim Construction,” guest lecture for the course Intellectual Property for Technology Entrepreneurs and Managers at UCLA’s Anderson School of Management and Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science (May 2017)
- "Working with Experts," Irell MCLE Presentation (March 2016)
- "Introduction to Patent Litigation," guest lecture for the course Intellectual Property for Technology Entrepreneurs at the Anderson School of Management, UCLA (May 2015)
- "Claim Construction Strategies," Irell Patent Nuts & Bolts Program (January 2014)
- "Patent-Eligible Subject Matter after Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., and Marine Polymer Technologies, Inc. v. HemCon, Inc.," Irell MCLE Presentation (April 2012)
UCLA School of Law (J.D., 2010); Editor, Journal of Law and Technology
Stanford University (B.S., Electrical Engineering; B.A., Science, Technology and Society, 2004)
- California, 2010
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Central and Northern Districts of California