Los Angeles





UC Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law (JD, 2003)

Brandeis University (Ph.D., biochemistry, 1996)

Swarthmore College (BA, biochemistry, 1990)


Amir A. Naini is a partner at Russ, August & Kabat, where he specializes in representing life sciences and high technology clients in litigation, transactions, and strategic counseling involving intellectual property rights, with an emphasis on patent-related matters. Prior to joining Russ, August & Kabat, Mr. Naini was counsel at Irell & Manella LLP, where he was a member of the litigation and intellectual property workgroups. Mr. Naini has been selected as a Southern California “Super Lawyer” by Super Lawyers Magazine in 2014, 2015 and 2016, and was previously selected as a “Rising Star” in intellectual property litigation by Super Lawyers Magazine in 2005 and 2008-2013.

Mr. Naini is co-author, along with Andrei Iancu of Irell & Manella LLP, of Chapter 3 in Patent Litigation, 2nd Ed., which describes and provides strategic guidance for the opening phase of patent litigation.

Mr. Naini earned his J.D. at the University of California, Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law, where he was articles editor of the Berkeley Technology Law Journal and was awarded the Prosser Award in Property Law.

Mr. Naini received his B.A. in biochemistry from Swarthmore College, and his Ph.D. in biochemistry from Brandeis University. His doctoral research focused on the structure and function of ion channels, the proteins that mediate cellular electrical properties. After his doctoral studies, his postdoctoral research at Stanford involved studying the detailed molecular mechanisms by which protein kinases transduce and record nerve cell activity. Prior to law school, Mr. Naini gained industry experience with a genomics company.



  • Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc. et al. and Verinata Health, Inc. et al. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., patent cases in the Northern District of California and inter partes review proceedings in the U.S.P.T.O relating to non-invasive DNA-based prenatal testing for chromosomal abnormalities.
  • Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., a patent case in the Southern District of New York relating to Regeneron’s Eylea and Zaltrap anti-angiogenesis drugs.
  • SoftView LLC v. Apple Inc. et al., a patent case in the District of Delaware involving Apple and Android smart phone manufacturers and web browsers for mobile devices.
  • Centocor v. Genentech, Inc. and City of Hope National Medical Center, a patent case in the Central District of California relating to fundamental biotechnology patents owned by Genentech and City of Hope.
  • INOVA Diagnostics, Inc. v. Euro-Diagnostica AB et al., a patent case in the Southern District of California involving diagnostic tests relating to rheumatoid arthritis.
  • CooperVision, Inc. v. CIBA Vision Corp., patent cases in the District of Delaware and the Eastern District of Texas relating to CooperVision’s Biofinity silicone hydrogel contact lenses.
  • AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. GlaxoSmithKline plc, an antitrust case in the Central District of California involving claims of monopolization of the anti-retroviral drug market.
  • Quidel Corp. v. Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc., a patent case in the Southern District of California involving lateral flow immunoreactive diagnostics.