Dominik Slusarczyk's practice focuses on intellectual property litigation, evaluation and licensing. He has represented a variety of clients—patent inventors as well as a range of corporate plaintiffs and defendants—at all stages of intellectual property disputes. The bulk of Dominik's experience is in patent cases relating to complex technology, including computer architecture, data processing and semiconductor packaging.
Dominik earned his J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where he was senior editor of the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. While in law school, he served as a judicial intern at the Santa Barbara County Superior Court.
Prior to law school, Dominik worked as a software and embedded systems engineer in real-time applications. He is fluent in Polish and conversational in Spanish.
- Intel Corp. v. Future Link Systems, LLC (D. Del.). Represented Future Link in a declaratory judgment action originally brought by Intel seeking relief with respect to nine patents. Counterclaimed for infringement of 15 patents—including patents relating to on-chip interconnect architectures, integrated circuit thermal monitoring systems, computer security and processing performance optimization—and obtained favorable claim construction and summary judgment outcomes.
- Hollingsworth v. Perry (U.S. Supreme Court). Amicus brief argued on behalf of Equality California that petitioners lacked Article III standing to appeal the district court’s judgment holding California’s Proposition 8 unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the appeal on that basis, leaving in place the district court’s judgment.
- Tessera, Inc. v. UTAC (Taiwan) Corp. (N.D. Cal.). Represented Tessera against UTAC (Taiwan) in a breach of contract dispute relating to intellectual property in the semiconductor packaging field.
- VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corp. (N.D. Cal.). Represents the plaintiff in a patent infringement suit relating to power delivery architecture, cache memories, transistor fabrication technology, power management, and semiconductor packaging in multiple Intel processor architectures.
- SoftView LLC. v. Apple Inc. et al. (D. Del.). Represented SoftView against Apple and Android smart phone manufacturers in a litigation involving patents relating to web browsers for mobile devices.
Honors & Awards
- Recognized on the list of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch (2024)
- "Will the Supreme Court Seismically Shift the Patent Damages Landscape in WesternGeco v. ION?" The Intellectual Property Strategist (2018)
- "What Cannot Be Patented?" Cal. Litig. Rev. (2016)
- "Alice's Restaurant: Putting Mayo On a New Revolt Against 'Ineligible' Patents," Cal. Litig. Rev. (2015)
University of Pennsylvania Law School (J.D., 2012); Senior editor, University of Pennsylvania Law Review
Harvey Mudd College (B.S., Computer Science and Mathematics, 2005), with Distinction
- California, 2012
- U.S. District Court for the Central and Northern Districts of California
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit