Richard M. Koehl, Ph.D., is an intellectual property lawyer in the New York office of Hughes Hubbard & Reed.
Richard has represented clients in high-stakes patent and trade secret cases, including several bet-the-company cases with the possibility of significant damages or an injunction. He has appeared in district courts around the country, as well as at the U.S. International Trade Commission and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), and he has participated in all major aspects of patent litigations, including temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction proceedings, fact and expert depositions, technology tutorials, Markman proceedings, summary judgment, trial, post-trial briefing and CAFC appeals.
Many of Richard's cases have concerned wireless communications, cable, LCD, networking, telephony, computer software, consumer electronics, financial services, video gaming, internet media, fiber optics and broadcasting technologies.
In addition to his experience as a trial attorney, Richard has a technical background. Prior to attending Columbia Law School, he earned his Ph.D. from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2000 for his work concerning spatial and temporal ultrafast imaging and control of terahertz wave packets, for which he received a patent. He graduated from Rice University in 1995 with a B.A. in chemistry.
Richard is a member of the New York Bar Association and is admitted to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. He is also registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
New York State
Rambus Inc. v. Infineon Technologies AG et al. (E.D. Va.): Trial counsel for a major DRAM, or dynamic random-access memory, chip manufacturer. Successfully asserted "unclean hands" defense in connection with the plaintiff's alleged spoliation of documents. Richard was mentioned in the article "Deals & Suits: Rambus v. Infineon" in the June 2005 issue of Corporate Counsel
CashEdge Inc. v. Yodlee Inc. (N.D. Cal.): Trial counsel for an online financial services provider in a nine-patent case against its primary competitor
NICE Systems v. Witness Systems Inc. et al. (N.D. Ga. and D. Del.): Counsel for NICE in multidistrict litigation against one of its primary competitors. The case involved VOIP technology
MedPointe Healthcare Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (D. Del.): Counsel for an innovator drug company in a patent case involving azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray
Digital Security Systems Corp. v. Sharp Corp. et al. (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for Sharp in a patent case involving Blu-ray technology
Apeldyn Corp. v. Sharp Corp. et al. (D. Del.): Trial counsel for Sharp in a patent case involving LCD technology
Broadcom Inc. v. Emulex Corp. (C.D. Cal.): Counsel for the defendant in a multipatent case brought by a major competitor
Agere Systems Inc. v. Intersil Corp. et al. (D. Del. and E.D. Pa.): Counsel in a combined patent and trade secrets matter involving 802.11 Wi-Fi technology
Lucent Technologies Inc. v. Gateway Inc., Dell Inc. and Microsoft Corp. (S.D. Cal.): Counsel for the patent holder in a case involving MPEG video coding and other technologies
Priority Access Solutions v. International Business Machines Corp. (E.D. Tex.): Trial counsel for the defendant in a case involving the licensing of networked software