Miranda Jones is an intellectual property litigator specializing in patent litigation. Recognized as the Texas Lawyer’s Top Woman in IP in 2018, she has been helping clients navigate complex patent trial and appeal proceedings for over a decade. Drawing from her breadth of experience, Miranda works closely with clients to develop and implement efficient patent litigation strategies that best fit the unique circumstances of each case. Miranda has handled matters in a wide range of technologies, including the pharmaceutical, chemical, electrical and mechanical fields.

Miranda has represented clients in patent cases in federal courts across the country including Texas, Pennsylvania, California, Washington D.C., and Virginia. In addition to her trial practice, she has handled appeals before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and before the United States Supreme Court.

Honors & Recognitions

Texas Lawyer, Top Woman in IP Law, 2018

Texas Rising Stars, Intellectual Property Litigation, 2016-2018

Best Lawyers in America, Litigation - Patent, 2020

Burton Award for Legal Achievement

Adrian Fischer Award for Legal Research and Writing, Permanent Injunction, a Remedy by Any Other Name Is Patently Not the Same: How eBay v. MercExchange Affects the Patent Right of Non-Practicing Entities, 14 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 1035 (2007)

  • Best Lawyers in America

Credentials

Education

J.D., George Mason University School of Law, magna cum laude

George Mason Law Review, Articles Editor
Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Symposium Executive Editor

 B.A., University of Houston, magna cum laude, Chemistry

Admissions

U.S. Supreme Court

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas

Texas

Clerkships

  • Law Clerk to the Honorable Pauline Newman, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • Intern to the Honorable Edward Damich, United States Court of Federal Claims

Experience

Supreme Court

  • Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 13-0896 (U.S.): Supreme Court counsel for Commil in appeal involving induced infringement. (Opinion)
  • Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, No. 15-0446 (U.S.): Supreme Court counsel for Amicus Law Professors in Support of Petitioner.
  • Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc. No. 15-1189 (U.S.): Submitted amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of law professors.

Appellate Court

  • Rembrandt Wireless v. Samsung Electronics, No. 16-1729: Appellate counsel for Rembrandt in challenge of $16.9 million patent infringement verdict against Samsung.
  • CSIRO v. Cisco, No. 15-1066 (Fed. Cir.): Appellate counsel for CSIRO in appeal involving patent litigation.
  • Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 12-1042 (Fed. Cir.): Appellate counsel for Commil in appeal involving patent litigation.
  • Better Bags, Inc. v. Redi Bag USA, LLC, No. 13-1064 (Fed. Cir.): Appellate counsel for Better Bags in an appeal involving patent infringement; obtained a Rule 36 affirmance in favor of Better Bags. (Opinion).
  • Rochester Drug Co-Operative Inc., et al. v. Braintree Laboratories, No. 11-1539 (Fed. Cir.): Class counsel for an appeal involving an injunction.

Inter Partes Review (IPR)

  • LG Elecs., et al. v. Rosetta Wireless Corp., on IPR No. 2016-01516: Lead counsel for the patent owner (Rosetta) in IPR proceedings. Obtained a denial of institution of IPR on behalf of the patent owner.

Trial Court

  • BASF Plant Science, LP v. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation et al, Case No. 2:17-cv-00503 (E.D. Va.): Trial counsel for Grains Research and Development Corp. in patent infringement litigation against BASF Plant Sciences and Cargill Inc.
  • Red Rock Analytics, LLC v. Samsung Elecs. Co. et al., 2:17-cv-00101 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for Red Rock Analytics in patent infringement litigation against Samsung Elecs.
  • Rembrandt Wireless Technologies IP v. Samsung Electronics Co., et al., No. 2:13-cv-00213 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for Rembrandt in litigation for patent infringement involving Bluetooth technology.
  • Entro Industries, Inc. v. Hydraulic Systems, Inc., 4:16-cv-01153 (S.D. Tex.): Counsel for Entro Industries in patent infringement litigation involving oil drilling rig walkers.
  • Broadcom v. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, No. 6:09-cv-00513 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • CSIRO v. Lenovo, et al., No. 6:09-cv-00399 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • CSIRO v. Cisco, No. 6:11-cv-00343 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • CSIRO v. MediaTek, No. 6:12-cv-00578 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for CSIRO in litigation for patent infringement involving 802.11 wireless LAN technology.
  • MicroUnity Systems Engineering Inc. v. Acer et al., No. 2:10-cv-00091 (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for MicroUnity in litigation for patent infringement of MicroUnity’s Media Processor patent portfolio.
  • In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation, 14-md-02521 (N.D. Cal.): Class counsel representing direct purchasers in antitrust multidistrict litigation against Endo Pharmaceuticals over delays in the generic version of the drug.
  • In re Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation, 14-md-02516 (D. Conn.): Class counsel representing purchasers alleging that Boehringer Ingelheim unlawfully paid to delay entry of a generic version of the Aggrenox blood-clot medication.
  • King Drug Co. of Florence, Inc., et al. v. Cephalon, Inc. et al., No. 2:06-cv-01797 (E.D. Pa.): Class counsel for Direct Purchaser Plaintiff class in an antitrust class action stemming from an innovator drug company’s assertion of a patent related to modafinil.
  • Rochester Drug Co-Operative Inc., et al. v. Braintree Laboratories Inc., No. 1:07-cv-00142 (D. Del.): Class counsel for litigation of an antitrust action stemming from an innovator drug company’s assertion of a patent related to polyethylene glycol.
  • Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co. Inc. v. Unimed Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., No. 1:09-cv-00957 (N.D. Ga.): Class counsel for litigation of an antitrust action stemming from an innovator drug company’s assertion of a patent related to a testosterone gel.

Newsroom

Affiliations

The Honorable Nancy F. Atlas Intellectual Property American Inn of Court, Member

Intellectual Property Owner's Association, Member