Salumeh R. Loesch

Of Counsel« back

  • J.D., University of Michigan, 2004
  • B.A., Government, Cornell University, 2000
  • Oregon, 2009
  • New York, 2007 (inactive)
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York



Ms. Loesch litigates intellectual property matters in Federal Courts around the country, representing a variety of clients, including Fortune 500 e-commerce and software companies. She has represented both plaintiffs and defendants, and multiple clients in joint defense groups and in large multi-defendant litigations. She has extensive experience managing complex patent litigations, including participating in trials, taking and defending depositions, working with experts, and engaging in settlement negotiations.

Ms. Loesch also represents clients in trademark and copyright infringement suits in Federal Court and in trademark opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.


Hodgson Russ LLP, Buffalo, New York
Associate | 2006 – 2008


Law clerk to the late Honorable John T. Elfvin of the Western District of New York | 2004 – 2006

  • Board Member, Oregon District Court Historical Society
  • Member, Federal Bar Association
  • Program Committee, Silicon Valley Women’s Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Member, American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Member, Oregon Patent Law Association

Ms. Loesch represents parties in patent, trademark, and copyright cases, in a number of District Courts and before the TTAB. Her patent litigation experience includes cases involving a variety of technologies for a diverse client base. A representative sample of her representations is below (represented party underlined):

  • Gordon v. Bread and Badger, LLC, Case No. 15-cv-02605 (C.D. Cal.): Represented local craft company in trademark case, where asserted mark was “honey badger don’t care.”
  • Synopsys v. Mentor, Case No. 12-cv-06467 (N.D. Cal.): Represented EDA company in competitor patent litigation. Won partial summary judgment of patent invalidity under Section 101.
  • Walker Digital Litigations, Case Nos. 11-313-SLR, 11-315-SLR, 12-140-SLR, 11-cv-369-RGA, 11-cv-990-RGA (D. Del.): Represented,, and Target in patent litigations involving e-commerce technology. Several cases dismissed based on finding that the plaintiff lacked standing. Lack of standing decision affirmed by Federal Circuit.
  • Purifics v. Puralytics, Oppn. No. 91194706 (TTAB): Prevailed in TTAB argument defending against trademark opposition.
  • Proxyconn v. Microsoft, Dell, Acer, and HP, Case No. 11-cv-01681 DOC (C.D. Cal.): Patent litigation involving data access in networks. Case stayed pending inter partes review.
  • University of Washington v. General Electric, Case No. 10-cv-01933 (W.D. Wash.): Patent litigation involving ultrasound technology. Case stayed pending reexamination and then dismissed with prejudice.
  • Rmail v. PayPal and, Case No. 10-cv-00258-TJW (E.D. Tex.): Patent litigation involving e-commerce technology.
  • Aristrocrat v. IGT, Case No. 06-cv-3717 (N.D. Cal.): Inequitable conduct bench trial in patent litigation involving gaming technology.
  • Research Corporation Technologies v. Microsoft, Case No. 01-cv-0658 (D. Ariz.): Patent litigation trial involved six asserted patents regarding halftoning technology.
  • DownUnder Wireless v., et al., Case No. 09-cv-0365 (E.D. Tex.): Stipulation of dismissal without prejudice in multi-defendant litigation regarding cellular phone technology.
  • Tobin Family Education & Health Foundation, et al., v., Case No. 09-cv-0160 (M.D. Fla.): Patent litigation involving e-commerce technology.
  • Quito Enterprises v. Netflix, et al., Case No. 08-cv-23543 (S.D. Fla.): Represent Hulu, NBC Universal, and News Corp. in a patent litigation involving e-commerce technology.