Sorin Zaharia, Ph.D., is a litigation counsel in O’Melveny’s San Francisco office who focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation. Dr. Zaharia has successfully represented clients across a wide range of industries, including geolocation and navigation, wireless standards, wearable devices, digital cameras, graphical user interfaces, image and video processing, augmented reality, cloud computing, semiconductor microlithography, electronic circuits, light-emitting diodes, medical robotics, and pharmaceuticals.
Dr. Zaharia has worked extensively on all stages of patent litigation matters, from fact and expert discovery to claim construction, Daubert, case-dispositive motions, trial, and post-trial. He has played a pivotal role on trial teams for five patent litigation and trade secret matters in federal district court and participated in Section 337 ITC investigations. Dr. Zaharia has worked closely with technical experts, conducted and defended depositions of fact and expert witnesses, argued at discovery, claim construction, and pretrial hearings, and prepared and examined witnesses at trial. As a USPTO-registered attorney, he is well-versed in PTAB post-grant practice and has actively participated in multiple IPR proceedings.
Before joining O’Melveny, Dr. Zaharia honed his legal skills as an associate in the San Francisco office of another major international law firm.
Prior to entering the legal field, Dr. Zaharia made significant contributions as a research scientist in a prominent government laboratory, where he conducted groundbreaking research in computational space physics. Dr. Zaharia’s impressive scientific career led to his authoring of more than thirty scientific papers published in high-caliber refereed technical journals. With his unique blend of technical expertise, research experience, and legal acumen, Dr. Zaharia approaches all litigation matters with a critical, analytical mindset, ensuring a deep understanding of the complexities involved.
- Defended major technology company in lawsuit relating to wearable devices. Secured transfer of the case from W.D. Tex. to N.D. Cal., followed by settlement on terms highly favorable to the client.
- Defended major technology company in lawsuit relating to Bluetooth technology. Case was dismissed by plaintiff soon after receiving Rule 11 motion.
- Represented major consumer electronics company in lawsuit relating to geofencing technology. Case settled on the eve of trial on terms favorable to the client.
- Defended major technology and consumer electronics companies in multiple lawsuits, including in district court, at the ITC, and in IPR proceedings, related to geolocation and ad hoc networks. Following transfer of the cases from E.D. Tex. to N.D. Cal., the cases settled on terms favorable to the clients.
- Defended major technology company and automaker in two lawsuits and related IPR related to navigation technologies. The cases settled on terms favorable to the clients after discovery unearthed strong invalidating prior art.
- Represented global manufacturer in Section 337 investigations relating to semiconductor microlithography and digital camera patents (ITC).
- Defended major technology company in lawsuit relating to augmented reality. The case settled on terms favorable to the client after discovery uncovered strong invalidating prior art.
- Defended major digital camera manufacturer in two patent litigation cases involving graphical user interfaces, image and video capture, and face detection (C.D. Cal.); juries returned non-infringement verdicts in both cases and invalidated one of the patents.
- Represented industry-leading virtualization and cloud computing company in patent litigation relating to virtualization (D. Del.).
- Represented pioneering medical company in patent litigation involving medical robotics (D. Del.).
- Defended start-up electronics company in patent litigation related to ultra-violet LEDs (N.D. Cal.); case settled on terms favorable to client.
- Defended major biotech company in patent litigation related to blockbuster cancer therapy (N.D. Cal.); court granted summary judgment for defendant, found the case exceptional, and awarded attorney’s fees.
- Represented major electronics manufacturer in litigation involving analog-to-digital converter patents (D. Del.).
- Represented global manufacturer initiating 28 U.S.C. 1782 proceedings directed to obtaining US discovery for use in foreign patent litigation (N.D. Cal, D. Ariz., 9th Cir.); district courts granted discovery in both proceedings and the Ninth Circuit affirmed following expedited appeals.
Admissions
Bar Admissions
- California
Court Admissions
- US District Court, Southern, Central, and Northern Districts of California
- US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
- US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
Registered to Practice
- US Patent & Trademark Office
Education
- University of California at Berkeley School of Law, J.D.: Senior Annual Review Editor, Berkeley Technology Law Journal
- Princeton University, Ph.D., Astrophysical Sciences/Plasma Physics
- University of Bucharest, B.Sc., Physics
Professional Activities
Member
- American Bar Association
Publications
- Author, “3 Ways Courts Approach Patent Eligibility at Trial and After,” Law360 (2023)
- Author, “Burden of Proof in Medtronic: The Federal Circuit’s Idiosyncratic Patent Jurisprudence Vetoed, Again,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal (2015)
Speaking Engagements
- Presenter, “Patent Eligibility at Trial and Post-Trial: District Court Approaches and Implications for Litigation,” Bar Association of San Francisco (2024)