Andrew P. Valentine concentrates his practice in patent, intellectual property, high technology and complex commercial litigation.

In May 2009, the San Jose/Silicon Valley Business Journal profiled Mr. Valentine in its "Who's Who in Silicon Valley" edition, joining other leading Silicon Valley executives nominated for their leadership. The respected research publisher Chambers & Partners recognizes Mr. Valentine in Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business. In May 2006, California Lawyer magazine featured him in the article "Letter from East Palo Alto." He has been named a Northern California Super Lawyer as the result of a joint research project conducted by Law & Politics and San Francisco magazines.

Mr. Valentine is one of the Pro Bono Coordinators for DLA Piper's Silicon Valley office.

Recent Matters

• Tried cases for Hewlett-Packard before the International Trade Commission (Washington, DC) in spring 2005 and spring 2008.
• Lans v. Hewlett-Packard; Uniboard v. Hewlett-Packard: Obtained summary judgment for Hewlett-Packard in patent infringement cases; argued and prevailed in Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
• Cambrian v. Maxtor: Obtained summary judgment of patent unenforceability in favor of Maxtor.
• The Produce Exchange v. SBI: Obtained favorable judgment for TPE after two week binding arbitration in dispute relating to database software.
• Hsu v. SSI: Obtained multimillion-dollar jury verdict in a trial relating to the improper re-purchase of former employee's vested shares.
• Obtained million-dollar judgment for a high tech company in binding arbitration over a complex royalty dispute.
• Obtained multimillion-dollar judgment in a trial for a company fraudulently induced into purchasing a shopping center.
• Obtained defense judgment in trial concerning the rights and obligations of a real estate developer and a cable television franchise under a municipal ordinance.
• Obtained summary judgment for a defendant in a case alleging misappropriation of trade secrets.
• Defeated a motion for preliminary injunction in a trademark infringement case involving the use of the term "universal server" in the computer industry.