Tony Rowles focuses on high-tech patent litigation, counseling and representing clients in district court patent litigation, appeals at the Federal Circuit, Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and prosecution and post-grant review proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Tony has experience in all aspects of intellectual property litigation, including analyzing and valuing large IP portfolios, managing complex source code review, working closely with expert witnesses, arguing claim construction at Markman hearings and examining and cross-examining witnesses at trial. He also represents clients in a variety of other technology-related areas, including IP licensing and commercial disputes regarding IP ownership.

Prior to law school, Tony helped develop robotic solutions to retail inventory management as a researcher on Intel’s “Future of Retail” project. He also worked as an engineer in the defense industry, creating machine vision and sensor tools for military platforms. Before college, Tony served as an intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army.


  • Immersion v. Apple (ITC, D. Del.). Represented Immersion, a longtime developer of tactile feedback, or “haptic,” technology, in a Section 337 investigation against Apple and AT&T and a related district court case in Delaware and advised Immersion regarding parallel litigation in China. Apple also filed 14 inter partes review petitions challenging the asserted patents; all but four were denied at the institution stage. Tony took the lead role in developing Immersion’s technical domestic industry case, including examining Immersion’s technical domestic industry expert at trial. Tony also argued at the Markman hearing and cross-examined several Apple engineers. Apple and Immersion reached a confidential settlement and license agreements just days before the Chief ALJ’s decision was set to be issued.
  • Intel v. Future Link Systems (D. Del.). Represented Future Link Systems in a declaratory judgment action originally brought by Intel seeking relief with respect to nine patents. Future Link counterclaimed for infringement of 15 patents related to performance, power efficiency and security features in Intel’s processor architectures. Tony joined the Future Link team after summary judgment to assist with trial strategy and handle the examination of one of Future Link’s damages experts. With every one of Intel’s high-volume processors accused of infringing multiple patents, Future Link’s damages demand was on the order of $10 billion. Shortly before trial, Intel agreed to a confidential settlement.

Honors & Awards

  • Listed among the “Rising Stars” in Managing Intellectual Property’s IP Stars (2019)


Harvard Law School (J.D., 2014), cum laude

Carnegie Mellon University (B.S., Electrical and Computer Engineering, 2011)


  • California
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
  • Department of Veterans Affairs
Jump to Page