Naveen Modi Image

Naveen Modi

Global Co-Chair, Intellectual Property Group

Paul Hastings

Naveen Modi is the Global Co-Chair of the Intellectual Property group at Paul Hastings, overseeing the firm’s Global Intellectual Property group consisting of more than 100 attorneys.

Mr. Modi’s practice covers all aspects of high stakes IP-related legal work, including litigation before federal district courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission, and federal appeals courts; post-grant proceedings, interferences and derivation proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB); arbitrations; and due diligence and client counseling. He has led “bet-the-company cases” involving patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and copyright issues. He has represented both companies accused of infringement and those whose IP has been infringed in a wide range of technical areas, including electronics, software, business methods, medical devices, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology.

Mr. Modi has lectured nationally and internationally on IP law, including in Africa, India, Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, and Thailand. He helped develop and has been teaching a course on Federal Circuit Practice at the George Mason University School of Law for over a decade. Prior to joining Paul Hastings, Mr. Modi was a partner in the Intellectual Property group of an international law firm. He clerked for the Honorable Alvin Anthony Schall at U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In law school, he served as a Writing Fellow and member of the George Mason Law Review. Before pursuing a legal career, Mr. Modi was an engineer with Lockheed Martin Federal Systems, Raytheon Systems Company, and Hughes Aircraft. Mr. Modi graduated from George Mason University School of Law, magna cum laude, and also holds a B.S. in electrical engineering from George Mason University, with high distinction.

Mr. Modi has been widely recognized over the years for his significant and deep experience in IP law. IAM Patent 1000 has recognized Mr. Modi as a top strategist, extremely articulate presenter and all-round thought leader.” It has noted that “[h]e’s just incredibly high quality – a hard worker with a wonderful temperament’” and that “[p]eople think the world of the ‘calm and collected’ Modi, ‘an incredibly thoughtful guy who presents great strategic options tailored to the business goals of his clients.’” Chambers USA has ranked him in Band 1, noting that “[h]e is very strategic and does an excellent job of mapping out a strategy that fully integrates substantive arguments with procedural nuances,” that “[h]e explains complex issues very well, and is very responsive to questions and requests,” and that “[h]e is an amazing litigator who presents very well.”

Mr. Modi has been especially recognized for his appellate experience. He has led over 100 appeals at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and has been involved in all aspects of the appellate process, including briefing and oral argument. Law360 recognized him as an Intellectual Property MVP in 2019 for racking up nine wins at the Federal Circuit, having successfully represented clients such as Google and Samsung. The Legal 500 also has recognized Mr. Modi as a “key lawyer” for appeals.

Recent Articles by Naveen Modi

Use of PTAB Decisions in District Court Litigation

As the above cases illustrate, PTAB decisions have affected district court cases in different ways. Determining whether the use of a PTAB decision is likely to be permitted or will have any effect requires a multifactorial analysis that considers at least the nature of the PTAB outcome (e.g., final or preliminary), factors contributing to that outcome (e.g., whether they were based on the merits of the case), and potential drawbacks attached to the requested use (e.g., jury confusion). Additional considerations might include, for example, the level of sophistication of the technology already being considered by the jury, which might factor into a court’s analysis of the likelihood of jury confusion. Parties seeking to rely on PTAB decisions in district court should consider these factors. The AIA has only been in place for five years and the law in this area will continue to develop over the next several years.

Past Events with Naveen Modi

Patent Litigation Masters™ 2023

Held May 15-17, 2023