Andrea Pallios Roberts is of counsel in the Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, Trademark and Trade Secrets practice at Paul Hastings and is based in the firm’s Palo Alto office.
Ms. Roberts’ practice focuses on high-stakes technology litigation with an emphasis on intellectual property, primarily patent, trade secret, copyright and trademark infringement, breach of contract, and unfair competition. Ms. Roberts has experience representing clients in cases involving a variety of technologies, including online search systems, online advertising systems, battery saving, mobile messaging, autonomous vehicles, fiber optics, gene synthesis, pharmaceuticals, and CAD. She has represented plaintiffs and defendants in federal and state courts throughout the country, and has tried cases in California, Texas, Washington, and Delaware.
Litigating complex cases is Ms. Roberts’ specialty. She has successfully tried multiple cases and has served as lead trial counsel in federal court. Ms. Roberts’ trial experience allows her to ensure that her clients are best prepared for trial, resulting in favorable results for her clients, whether it be through trial or a pretrial resolution.
- University of California, Hastings College of the Law, J.D. (magna cum laude), 2003
- University of California at Los Angeles, B.A., Political Science (cum laude), 2000
- Lead trial counsel for Dan Rasure, TheShop.Build, LLC and TheShop.Build San Fran, LLC in a trademark infringement suit brought by TechShop, Inc. in the Northern District of California. The plaintiff alleged that the former name of the defendants’ business, TechShop 2.0, and the current name of the business infringed the plaintiff’s TECHSHOP service marks. After a seven-day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict that defendants infringed TechShop’s marks, but awarded TechShop no damages.
- Represented Verizon against Huawei Technologies in a patent infringement lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas. Huawei alleged Verizon infringed patents relating to fiber optic technology allegedly essential to ITU standards. Verizon asserted counterclaims of breach of Huawei’s RAND obligations, fraud, and unfair competition. After three days of trial, the case settled favorably for Verizon.
- Represented Twist Biosciences against Agilent Technologies in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit in the California Superior Court for Santa Clara County. Agilent alleged breach of contract, breach of the duty of loyalty, and trade secret misappropriation against Twist and certain of its employees. The case settled on the eve of trial on the heels of the filing of numerous dispositive motions by Twist.
- Represented Waymo, LLC against Uber in a highly publicized trade secret misappropriation lawsuit in the Northern District of California. After four days of trial in which Waymo presented much of its case-in-chief, the parties reached a favorable settlement for Waymo. Uber granted Waymo a percentage of equity in Uber valued at $245 million, as well as injunctive relief that assures Uber will not use Waymo’s trade secret hardware and software self-driving car technology.
- Represented Google Inc. and YouTube in a patent infringement suit in the District of Delaware, in which plaintiff Personalized User Model, LLC accused Google’s search, advertising, and YouTube systems of infringing two patents relating to personalization services. The jury found all claims not infringed, and the patents invalid as anticipated and obvious. The jury further found that one of the named inventors breached his employment agreement with his prior employer (whose rights to the asserted patents Google had purchased) by failing to assign the inventions to that employer.
- Represented Motorola Mobility in trial of a breach of contract action against Microsoft in the Western District of Washington. The case involved standard setting organizations and FRAND licensing commitments. Microsoft alleged Motorola Mobility breached the duty of good faith and fair dealing in FRAND licensing commitments.
- Represented Google Inc. in a suit in the Eastern District of Texas brought by Bright Response, accusing Google’s advertising system of patent infringement. The patent related to a method for providing automatic responses to electronic messages. The plaintiff sought over $120 million in damages. Obtained a complete defense verdict of non-infringement and invalidity as to all asserted claims.
- Association of Business Trial Lawyers
- San Mateo County Bar Association
- California Women Lawyers
- Women’s Intellectual Property Lawyers Association
- Hellenic Law Society