Matthew D. Aichele

  Washington, DC

  maichele@raklaw.com

  310.826.7474

  Bio

  vCard

PRACTICE AREAS

Litigation & Trial

Intellectual Property

Patent Litigation

EDUCATION

Georgetown University Law Center (cum laude)

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (BS)

 


 

Matthew Aichele is a partner at Russ August & Kabat and chair of the firm’s International Trade Commission (ITC) Practice, specializing in intellectual property litigation with an emphasis on matters before the ITC. Prior to joining Russ August & Kabat, Mr. Aichele was an attorney with Latham & Watkins LLP, where he was a member of the Intellectual Property group.

Mr. Aichele has significant experience counselling clients through patent infringement actions before the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) and in federal district courts. Mr. Aichele has represented complainants, respondents, and third-parties in a number of ITC investigations, including through trial and post-trial Commission review. Mr. Aichele has also participated in consultations with US Customs and Border Protection regarding enforcement of ITC exclusion orders. Mr. Aichele also has significant experience litigating patent infringement actions in federal district courts.

Mr. Aichele earned his law degree cum laude from the Georgetown University Law Center. During law school, Mr. Aichele worked as a patent agent at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP. Mr. Aichele earned his Scientiae Baccalaureus (SB) in Nuclear Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2004, where he worked as a senior reactor operator in MIT’s Nuclear Reactor Laboratory.

Admitted

  • State Bar of Virginia (2009)
  • District of Columbia (2010)
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2005)
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (2022)

Recent Matters

  • Certain Active Matrix Organic Light-Emitting Diode Display Panels and Modules for Mobile Devices and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1351 (ALJ Moore) – represented Respondents MobileSentrix and Mobile Defenders, LLC against Complainant Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
  • Certain Networking Devices, Computers, and Components Thereof and Systems Containing the Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1298 (ALJ Cheney) – represented Complainant Proven against Respondent NetApp, Inc.
  • Certain High-Performance Gravity-Fed Water Filters and Products Containing the Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1294 (ALJ McNamara) – represented Respondent Brita Gmbh in investigation brought by Brita LP.
  • Certain Integrated Circuit Products and Devices Containing the Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1295 (ALJ Elliot) – represented Complainant Future Link Systems against Respondents Acer, AMD, Apple, Broadcom, Dell, Google, Lenovo, Motorola, Qualcomm, and Realtek.
  • Certain Networking Devices, Computers, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1275 (ALJ Elliot) – represented Complainant Proven against Respondents Arista, Cisco, Dell, F5, Juniper, and Palo Alto Networks.
  • Certain Laptops, Desktops, Servers, Mobile Phones, Tablets, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1280 (ALJ Elliot) – represented Complainant Sonrai against Respondents Amazon, Dell, EMC, LG, Lenovo, Motorola, and Samsung.
  • Certain Power Inverters and Converters, Vehicles Containing the Same, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1267 (ALJ Bhattacharyya) – co-represented Complainant Arigna against Respondents Audi, Lamborghini, BMW, Bentley, Daimler, General Motors, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, and Volkswagen. 
  • Certain Power Semiconductors, and Mobile Devices and Computers Containing Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1308 (ALJ Bhattacharyya) – co-represented Complainant Arigna against Respondents Apple, Google, Lenovo, Microsoft, Motorola, Samsung, and TCL.
  • Certain Touch-Controlled Mobile Devices, Computers, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1162 (ALJ Elliot) – represented Complainant Neodron against Respondents Amazon, Dell, HP, Lenovo, Microsoft, Motorola, and Samsung.
  • Certain Capacitive Touch-Controlled Mobile Devices, Computers, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1193 (ALJ Elliot) – represented Complainant Neodron against Respondents ASUS, Apple, Amazon, LG, Microsoft, Motorola, Samsung, and Sony.
  • Certain Capacitive Touch Sensing Systems, Capacitive Touch Sensing Controllers, Microcontrollers with Capacitive Touch Sensing Functionality, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1268 (ALJ Cheney) – represented Complainant Neodron against Respondents Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, Renesas, STMicroelectronics.
  • Certain Active Matrix OLED Display Devices and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1243 (ALJ Elliot) – represented Complainant Solas against Respondents BOE Technology, LG Display, and Samsung.
  • Certain Synthetic Roofing Underlayment Products and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1202 (ALJ McNamara) – represented Complainant Kirsch against Respondents Atlas Roofing Corporation; CertainTeed Corporation; CertainTeed LLC; DuPont De Nemours, Inc.; E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company; Epilay, Inc.; GAF Corporation; GAF Materials LLC; InterWrap Corp.; Owens Corning; Owens Corning Roofing & Asphalt, LLC; System Components Corporation; Tamko Building Products LLC
  • Certain Smart Thermostats, Smart HVAC Systems, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1185 (ALJ Shaw) – represented Complainant EcoFactor against Respondents Alarm.com, Daikin, Ecobee, Google, Schneider, and Vivint.
  • Certain Smart Thermostat Systems, Smart HVAC Systems, Smart HVAC Control Systems, And Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1258 (ALJ Elliot) – represented Complainant EcoFactor against Respondents Carrier, Ecobee, Emerson, Google, Honeywell, Johnson Controls, Resideo, and Siemens.
  • Certain Data Transmission Devices, Components Thereof, Associated Software, and Products Containing the Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1150 (ALJ Shaw) – represented Complainant Data Scape against Respondents Amazon Digital Services, LLC; Amazon.com, Inc.; Apple Inc.; Cellco Partnership d/b/a/ Verizon Wireless; Verizon Communications Inc.
  • NVIDIA v. Samsung—represented NVIDIA in a series of matters before the United States International Trade Commission and the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.*
  • InterDigital v. Nokia, ZTE, Huawei—represented InterDigital in a series of matters regarding mobile devices before the United States International Trade Commission and District Court for the District of Delaware.*
  • Cisco v. Arista—represented Arista in defending against patent infringement allegations before the United States International Trade Commission and Customs and Border Protection.*
  • 3M v. Amphenol—represented Amphenol in defending against patent infringement allegations regarding its cable technology before the United States International Trade Commission.*
  • Intellectual Ventures v. Honda et. al—represented Honda in defending against patent infringement allegations regarding motor technology before the United States International Trade Commission.*

 

*Represents experience from a previous law firm.