Masood Anjom

PARTNER

Masood Anjom is an intellectual property and patent trial lawyer with more than a decade of experience handling complicated cases. Formerly an award-winning electrical engineer, Mr. Anjom’s practice has included scores of large patent cases as well as extensive patent preparation and prosecution work. He was recognized in 2023 by IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Professionals, which said he is “quick to get to grips with the technology at issue and is brilliant at helping customers to achieve their goals.” He has represented plaintiffs and defendants in patent infringement suits in federal courts across the country, before the International Trade Commission and the USPTO. In his prosecution practice, he has prosecuted numerous patent applications (both U.S. and International) relating to various technologies including, for example, oil field applications (e.g., drilling technology, logging technology, and other aspects relating to exploration and production of oil and gas) and computer hardware and software. Additionally, he has counseled clients regarding IP related agreements and IP clearance as well as IP due diligence associated with corporate mergers and acquisitions. He has also served as lead counsel in multiple post-grant proceedings before the USPTO. Like his fellow partners at Alavi Anaipakos, Mr. Anjom has extensive experience in cross-border patent campaigns in countries such as Germany, Brazil, and China.

Phone: 713.751.2367

Email: manjom@aatriallaw.com

Follow me on LinkedIn

Phone: 713.751.2367

Email: manjom@aatriallaw.com

While obtaining his electrical engineering degree he worked in the nanotechnology lab at the Cullen College of Engineering of the University of Houston.

Mr. Anjom previously worked with Baker Botts L.L.P. and, later, with AZA so he has led teams at large firms as well as boutique firms, and has had an active trial docket representing both plaintiffs and defendants.  He also was a volunteer prosecutor for the City of Houston where he tried numerous jury trials.  He speaks English and Farsi fluently, and is also proficient in Urdu/Hindi and Arabic.

  • VisionX Technologies, LLC v. Sony Group Corporation et al  – Represented patent holder in a patent infringement dispute related to design and fabrication of image sensors. The case settled favorably for the client shortly before the Markman hearing.

  • Telecom Network Solutions, LLC v. AT&T Corp., et al. – Represented patent holder in a patent infringement dispute related to network congestion management in cellular networks. The case settled favorably for the client shortly after the Court issued its Markman order.

  • Telecom Network Solutions, LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc., et al. – Represented patent holder in a patent infringement dispute related to network congestion management in cellular networks. The case settled favorably for the client shortly after the Court issued its Markman order.

  • Telecom Network Solutions, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., et al. – Represented patent holder in a patent infringement dispute related to network congestion management in cellular networks. The case settled favorably for the client shortly after the Court issued its Markman order.

  • EVS Codec Technologies v. ZTE Corp. — Represented patent holder in a patent infringement dispute related to EVS Codec technology. The case settled favorably for the client shortly before trial.
 
  • Cellular Evolution LLC v. T-Mobile Us., Inc. et al. – Represented patent holder in a patent infringement dispute related to UMTS cellular technology. The case settled favorably for the client following the Markman hearing.
 
  • Cellular Evolution LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC et. al. – Represented patent holder in a patent infringement dispute related to UMTS cellular technology. The case settled favorably for the client following the Markman hearing.
 
  • Sony Mobile Communications Inc. v. EVS Codec Technologies, LLC, et al. – Represented patent holder in a patent infringement and contract dispute against Sony. The asserted patents related to a new voice coding technology used in smart phones. Following close of fact discovery and issuance of expert reports the case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • TechnipFMC PLC v. Mukherjee et al. — Represented plaintiff in a trade secrets misappropriation and breach of fiduciary duty case involving a former executive. Case settled favorably for client the day before trial.
 
  • St. Lawrence Communications, LLC v. Apple — Represented plaintiff St. Lawrence Communications LLC in patent infringement case against Apple. The asserted patents related to high definition speech codec technology in smartphones. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • St. Lawrence Communications, LLC v. Motorola Mobility — Represented plaintiff St. Lawrence Communications LLC in Eastern District of Texas patent infringement case against Motorola. Jury awarded more than 100% of the damages requested and also found Motorola’s infringement to be willful.
 
  • Saint Lawrence Communications, LLC v. ZTE Corporation, et al. — Represented plaintiff St. Lawrence Communications LLC in patent infringement case against ZTE. The asserted patents related to high definition speech codec technology in smartphones. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • St. Lawrence Communications, LLC v. HTC — Represented plaintiff St. Lawrence Communications LLC in patent infringement case against HTC. The asserted patents related to high definition speech codec technology in smartphones. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • Saint Lawrence Communications LLC v. LG Electronics, Inc., et al. — Represented plaintiff St. Lawrence Communications LLC in patent infringement case against LG. The asserted patents related to high definition speech codec technology in smartphones. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. ZTE Corporation, et al. – Represented plaintiff against cell phone manufacturer in a patent infringement suit related to patents directed to memory architecture. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. Apple, Inc. — Represented plaintiff against cell phone manufacturer in a patent infringement suit related to patents directed to memory architecture. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al. — Represented plaintiff against cell phone manufacturer in a patent infringement suit related to patents directed to memory architecture. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. HTC Corporation, et al. — Represented plaintiff against cell phone manufacturer in a patent infringement suit related to patents directed to memory architecture.
 
  • Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture LLC v. LG Electronics, Inc., et al. — Represented plaintiff against cell phone manufacturer in a patent infringement suit related to patents directed to memory architecture. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • Super Interconnect Technologies LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al. — Represented plaintiff against cell phone manufacturer in a patent infringement suit related to patents directed to signal processing and transmission. Case settled favorably for client before trial.
 
  • e-Watch Inc., et al. v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., et al. — Represented defendant cell phone manufacturer in a multi-defendant case involving two patents generally related to camera phone technology
 
  • Loramax LLC v HEB Grocery Company, LP – Represented defendant HEB in a patent infringement case related to patents directed to data transmission in a multicomputer network system.
 
  • Location Services IP, LLC v. HEB Grocery Company, LP, et al. — Represented HEB in a multi-defendant patent infringement case relating to geolocation systems
 
  • Data Carriers, LLC v. Plains All American Pipeline, LP – Represented defendant Plains in a patent infringement suit related to data processing and display.
 
  • SRI International, Inc. v. Dell Inc., et al. – Represented defendant Dell in a patent infringement lawsuit related to network surveillance technology.
 
  • VideoSqope, LLC v. IT Concepts, LLC – Represented defendant in a patent infringement lawsuit related to camera technology.
 
  • SoftView LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., et al. — Represented worldwide telecommunications company in defense of patent infringement allegations relating to mobile web browser technologies.
 
  • LG Electronics USA, Inc., et al. v. Whirlpool Corporation, et al. — Represented Whirlpool and its subsidiary Maytag in a case relating to refrigerator and ice maker patents asserted by both parties
 
  • LG Electronics USA, Inc., et al. v. Whirlpool Corporation — Represented Whirlpool and its subsidiary Maytag in a case relating to refrigerator and ice maker patents asserted by both parties
 
  • IPR 2015-01494 — Successfully represented patent owner as lead counsel in Inter Partes Review of a patent relating to computer architecture technology before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board where institution was denied.
 
  • IPR2015-01503 — Successfully represented patent owner as lead counsel in Inter Partes Review of a patent relating to computer architecture technology before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board where institution was denied.
 
  • Patent Reexamination 90/013,921 — U.S. Patent No. 6,795,805 — Successfully represented patent holder in ex parte reexamination proceedings instituted on a patent relating to periodicity enhancement in decoding speech signals with co-counsel. The patentability of all challenged claims was confirmed by the USPTO.
 
  • Patent Reexamination 90/013,894 – U.S. Patent No. 6,807,524 — Successfully represented patent holder in ex parte reexamination proceedings instituted on a patent relating to the use of a perceptual weighting device for efficient coding of a speech signal with co-counsel. The patentability of all challenged claims was confirmed by the USPTO.
 
  • IPR2017-01075 — Successfully defeated a request for Inter Partes Review of a patent relating to speech coding resulting in the Board’s refusal.

University of Houston Law Center, Houston, Texas – Doctorate of Jurisprudence, Summa Cum Laude

Houston Law Review, Associate Editor

    • LEX award for academic excellence in Contracts, Civil Procedure and Legal Writing
    • Locke Liddell & Sapp LLP Intellectual Property & Technology Scholarship

University of Houston, Houston, Texas – Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, Summa Cum Laude

    • Research Assistant – Worked with nanoelectronics and semiconductor fabrication group as part of a team responsible for construction of an ion beam assisted electron beam evaporation system. Assisted establishing the power system and connections for an Ion Implantation System.
    • Dean’s List, 1999-2003
    • Tau Beta Pi, Engineering Honors Society, 2001 – Present
    • Eta Kappa NU, Electrical Engineering Honors Society, 2003 – Present
    • The National Society of Collegiate Scholars, 2000 – Present
    • Outstanding Engineering Student Award from Texas Society of Professional Engineers, 2003
    • Among top five graduating seniors in the Electrical Engineering Department
  • IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Professionals, 2023-present
  • Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America, Intellectual Property Litigation and Patent Litigation, 2023-present
  • The Best Lawyers in America, 2024-present
  • State Bar of Texas
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
  • United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • United States District Court for the Western District of Texas
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
  • Houston Bar Association, Member
  • Houston Intellectual Property Law Association, Member
  • “Inter Partes Review: The Judiciary’s Appreciation For A Predictable Timeline,” Baker Botts IP Report, November 2013
  • “Curing The Plague? – The Federal Circuit’s Possibly-Heightened Scrutiny Of Inequitable Conduct Allegations,” Baker Botts IP Report, November 2009
  • “Intellectual Property Survey for the General Lawyer, University of Houston Law Foundation, Houston and Dallas, March 2007 (Mitchell D. Lukin, co-author)

609 Main Street, Suite 3200 Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 713.751.2362
Fax: 713.751.2341

Our offices are located in Houston, Texas, but our practice is nationwide and we regularly consult on matters in foreign jurisdictions as well.

By submitting your contact information, you acknowledge that you have read and agree to the legal disclaimer located here.

Join Our Team