Artboard 1 copy 5.png
 
 

FAQ

Why discerning clients continue to choose Bragalone Olejko Saad PC

CSS Accordion

We are a litigation and trial boutique. We routinely litigate cases in which the disputed recovery reaches the high eight or nine figures.


We handle general business litigation, patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, qui tam, false claims act, and whistleblower cases.


We represent our clients in courts around the country, including in California, New York, Delaware, North Carolina, and Texas. We also represent clients before the United States International Trade Commission and the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board.


Yes. Many if not most of our cases are against Fortune 500 companies that are represented by large national or international law firms. We have achieved positive outcomes for our clients versus Apple, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, Microsoft, Google, LG Electronics, LG Display, Samsung, SK hynix, Lenovo, Sony, Sharp, VIZIO, and Fitbit.


We have litigated claims involving a wide array of technologies, including LCD displays, light sensors, wearable biometrics, semiconductor processing, chip and circuit designs, software, mobile phone technologies, standard essential patents, medical devices, and orthodontics.


Yes. We represent both plaintiffs and defendants in our Intellectual Property Litigation practice and in our Business & Commercial Litigation practice, which creates a unique, dual perspective that benefits all of our clients. Our Qui Tam/Whistleblower practice relates solely to the representation of whistleblowers. We do not represent defendants in Qui Tam/Whistleblower litigation.


Yes. We have appeared as lead counsel in more than 100 Inter Partes Review and Covered Business Method Proceedings.


Yes. We routinely represent our clients in appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court.


Yes. While we handle some matters on traditional billable-hour arrangements, we prefer alternative fee arrangements that allow us to share in the risk and recovery of the case.