O’Melveny Worldwide

Brett Williamson is one of O’Melveny’s most experienced litigators. He leads IP cases for clients in a wide variety of industries, including computer hardware and software, telecommunications and media, electronics, pharmaceuticals, and medical devices. For over 30 years, Brett has helped technology companies solve their most critical legal challenges through a practical approach that prioritizes fundamental “big picture” advice over procedural tactics that can obscure the client’s ultimate business goals, while maintaining the sharp adversarial edge required to ensure winning outcomes.

Brett is routinely recognized among the most skilled IP litigators in the country. He has been named a Top Intellectual Property Lawyer in California multiple times by the Daily Journal, the same publication that listed his trial victory for client Allergan, Inc. as a Top Verdict of 2012. In 2023, Brett was selected as a member of Lawdragon’s inaugural 500 Leading Litigators in America, and he has been described as “a skilled and very practical patent litigator” and a “notable trade secret lawyer” by The Legal 500 US.

Brett is also a longtime member of O’Melveny’s administrative leadership team. He co-founded the firm’s Intellectual Property and Technology practice group, and heads that team in the Newport Beach office. Brett also served a five-year term (2006-2011) as managing partner of the Newport Beach office.

Brett has maintained a robust pro bono practice for more than three decades, most recently securing major victories for clients in the areas of low-income housing and homeless rights, criminal-justice reform, equal protection, and data privacy. He currently serves as O’Melveny’s firmwide partner in charge of pro bono.

Read More
  • Brett represents pioneering streaming platform Hulu, LLC, in defense of patent infringement litigation in the Central District of California involving technology for delivering multimedia content using a network of distributed servers. Brett's team successfully obtained dismissal of most of the original patents-in-suit on both noninfrigement and invalidity grounds, including rulings affirmed by the Federal Circuit in an appeal argued by Brett, and is currently engaged in pretrial proceedings relating to the remaining patent claim.
  • Brett also leads the representation of Hulu and fellow media companies fuboTV and World Wrestling Entertainment in defending patent claims brought in the Western District of Texas, the Central District of California, and the District of Delaware by the owner of patents directed to the automated use of dynamic advertising over streaming systems. The related cases have involved a successful petition for writ of mandate issued by the Federal Circuit to compel transfer from the plaintiff’s chosen Texas forum, and final written decisions in favor of Brett’s clients by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) canceling all challenged claims of seven asserted patents in inter partes review (IPR) and Covered Business Method proceedings, which are now being appealed by the plaintiff.
  • As lead trial counsel for Par Pharmaceutical in a federal trade secrets and unfair competition case in the District of New Jersey, Brett obtained a major victory when the court issued an injunction barring the defendant, a competing pharmaceutical company, from launching its version of Par's most profitable product (the cardiopulmonary drug Vasostrict®). In support of the injunction order, the court cited evidence of deliberate copying and subsequent destruction of Par’s proprietary information that was uncovered by Brett’s team during expedited discovery.
  • Brett also led the representation of Par in defending a separate case alleging federal antitrust claims involving Vasostrict®. After substantial discovery, Par moved for and was granted summary judgment on plaintiff's claims, in an order that was affirmed by the Fourth Circuit.  He continues to represent Par and its parent company Endo in multiple patent and antitrust matters, including cases involving pre-filled syringes for critical care, the antipsychotic drug Seroquel®, and the narcolepsy treatment Xyrem®. 
  • Brett served as lead counsel for a major consumer electronics company in parallel district court litigation and IPR proceedings involving power supply identification technology. He obtained a final written decision from the PTAB finding unpatentable all claims of a patent being asserted against the client in the district court, and then argued the appeal from that decision at the Federal Circuit, which summarily affirmed the PTAB.
  • As lead counsel for Therabody, Inc., the maker of Theragun™ percussive massage therapy devices, Brett is enforcing a large portfolio of utility and design patents against copycat manufacturers.  In one case pending in the Southern District of New York, the Court recently handed Brett’s team two significant victories on behalf of Therabody, denying motions for summary judgment of non-infringement and to dismiss claims of willfulness. 
  • Brett represented Google against plaintiff ART+COM InnovationPool (ACI) in a five-day jury trial in the District of Delaware involving Google Earth products, conducting all direct and cross examination of the technical expert witnesses on infringement and validity. After only an hour of deliberation, the jury found that none of the accused Google Earth products infringe and that Google had proven by clear and convincing evidence that all asserted claims were anticipated or obvious, and thus invalid. The verdict put to rest claims seeking US$106 million or more in alleged damages.
  • Brett and his team prevailed in a three-week trial for Allergan, a global leader in the development of innovative pharmaceutical and medical device products, in a case involving misappropriation of trade secrets against a major competitor relating to the marketing of the client’s leading aesthetic products, Botox® and the dermal filler Juvederm®. The court entered an injunction preventing the competitor from selling or marketing its product anywhere in the United States for an entire year following the judgment, an extraordinary remedy in a trade secrets case. Brett also represented the company in a Lanham Act case against the same competitor.
  • Brett served as lead counsel for an international consumer electronics company in defense of a series of patent infringement actions filed in the "rocket docket" Eastern District of Virginia, collectively alleging infringement of eight patents directed to smartphone technology for processing and transmitting multimedia content received via wireless networks onto alternative display devices. In the first phase of litigation at the trial court, Brett and his team obtained final judgments of non-infringement on all patents-in-suit, after which all cases settled on favorable terms to the client.
  • Brett represented a global leader in the design, manufacture, and sale of computerized gaming machines and systems in defending a patent infringement claim involving multi-line slot machines. Following a favorable claim construction after the Markman hearing, the client prevailed on a motion for summary judgment resulting in a full dismissal of all claims, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on appeal. Brett also served as lead litigation counsel for the client in other major patent cases, including successful infringement claims against a competitor in the District of Delaware, and prevailing on patent-based antitrust claims brought in the District of Nevada involving the “Wheel of Fortune” slot machine.
  • Brett was lead trial counsel for the successor-in-interest to a pioneering Internet services company in enforcement of a patent covering web-based video conferencing systems and methods against multiple defendants. Following district court rulings that effectively precluded our client from establishing infringement of any valid claims, Brett argued the appeal to the Federal Circuit which resulted in a reversal of the non-infringement judgment and remand to the district court.
  • Brett represented plaintiff, a subsidiary of B. Braun Medical Inc., in a case involving a patent for intravenous pharmaceuticals used during open heart surgery to minimize heart muscle damage caused by the interruption of blood flow. At trial, Brett successfully proved willful infringement, and defeated counterclaims alleging false advertising under the Lanham Act and Walker Process monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The Court entered a permanent injunction, estimated to be worth tens of millions of dollars in recovered sales revenue.
  • Brett represented the then-largest Southern California retail banking and lending institution in multi-defendant patent infringement litigation involving patents on a process for evaluating the credit of prospective home mortgage borrowers, obtaining a dismissal with prejudice on all claims.
  • Brett successfully defended a leading retailer of office supplies against an infringement complaint on a patent that claims a method for authentication of Internet-based transactions. He previously defended several other companies in similar cases asserting the same patent, all of which settled on favorable terms for the clients. 
  • Brett represented a leading provider of infrastructure solutions for wireless communications networks in the enforcement of patents covering an innovative method of connecting components to a multi-layer printed circuit board while minimizing power demands. Following substantial motion practice, the defendant agreed to take a royalty-bearing license to the patents-in-suit.


Bar Admissions

  • California
  • District of Columbia
  • New York

Court Admissions

  • US District Courts for the Northern, Eastern, Southern, and Central Districts of California, the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, the District of Columbia, and the District of Colorado
  • US Courts of Appeals, for the Federal, Second, Third, Ninth, and DC Circuits
  • US Supreme Court


  • University of Southern California, J.D., 1989: Order of the Coif; Articles Editor, Southern California Law Review
  • University of California, Irvine, B.A., 1986: cum laude

Honors & Awards

  • Recognized by Best Lawyers® for Litigation - Intellectual Property in Newport Beach, CA (2023-2024)
  • Recognized by The Legal 500 US for Patents: Litigation (Full Coverage) (2020-2021, 2024) and Trade Secrets (Litigation & Non-Contentious Matters) (2019-2021)
  • Named to the “500 Leading Litigators in America” list for Intellectual Property & Technology Litigation by Lawdragon® (2023)
  • Recognized by IAM Patent 1000 (2022-2023)
  • Recommended by Who’s Who Legal for Intellectual Property - Patents (2023)
  • Named a Top Intellectual Property Lawyer in California by the Daily Journal in 2015, 2018, 2020, and 2021
  • Named a “Super Lawyer” in surveys conducted by Law & Politics Media Inc. and published in Los Angeles magazine (2007-2020)
  • Trial victory for client Allergan, Inc., named as a Top Verdict of 2012 in California by the Daily Journal

Professional Activities


  • American Bar Association
  • Federal Circuit Bar Association
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)
  • Howard T. Markey Intellectual Property Inn of Court (President, 2016-2017)
  • Orange County Bar Association; Association of Business Trial Lawyers (ABTL), Orange County Chapter

Board of Directors

  • Public Law Center of Orange County
  • University of California, Irvine— Center for the Study of Democracy

Lawyer Representative

  • Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference (2009-2012


  • “Enhanced Infringement Damages in a Post-Seagate World,” Daily Journal, co-author (June 17, 2016)
  • “Rethinking Seagate At The Supreme Court” Law360 (March 17, 2016)
  • “Is The Seagate Test For Willful Infringement Here To Stay?” Law360 (April 7, 2015)
  • “Maintaining the Standard of Proof on Invalidity,” Law360 (February 9, 2011)
  • “IP in a downturn,” IP Review, co-author (Summer 2009)
  • “Post-Seagate: Advice of Counsel in Patent Defense,” Intellectual Property Litigation, co-author (Fall 2008)
  • “Struggle for Ownership,” The Recorder (April 11, 2007) (discussing KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. case)
  • “Remedying Injury to Goodwill and Reputation: Beacon Mutual and 'Public Confusion' Under the Lanham Act,” Intellectual Property Litigation, American Bar Association (Winter 2005)


  • “Where Does Willfulness Go From Here?,” University of California, Irvine IP Law Symposium (February 2020)
  • “Making a Federal Case Out of Trade Secrets Misappropriation,” Orange County Bar Association IP Section Institute (October 2016)
  • “The Future of Medical Diagnostic and Treatment Patents,” O’Melveny Corporate Counsel Seminar (September 2010)
  • “Improving Patent Adjudication Through ADR and Court Reform: International Mediation and Arbitration of Patent Cases,” Thomas Jefferson School of Law Patent Law Symposium (April 3, 2009)
  • “Patents and The Real-World: How Recent Supreme Court Cases and Proposed Legislation Will Impact You and Your Business,” O’Melveny & Myers LLP Special Patent Law Presentation (Sept. 18 and 20, 2007)