• Share
  • Email
  • Print

Theodore J. Angelis

Fax +1.206.370.6006

Theo Angelis is an intellectual property and appellate litigator who appears in trial and appellate courts, in administrative tribunals, and in arbitration proceedings throughout the United States. 

Mr. Angelis’ unique experience—as an intellectual property litigator who co-chaired the firm’s appellate practice and has an active appellate practice—allows him to craft and present especially persuasive and compelling arguments.  He also provides clear and strategic advice to clients facing unsettled or complex legal issues, and he assists them in efficiently solving problems and minimizing risk.

Mr. Angelis has litigated patent and other IP matters before the U.S. District Courts in California, Delaware, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington, as well as the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and International Trade Commission.  Mr. Angelis’ appellate practice focuses primarily on the Federal and Ninth Circuits, as well as the D.C. Circuit, where Mr. Angelis served as a law clerk.  Mr. Angelis also regularly handles appeals in state appellate courts. 

Mr. Angelis has received numerous awards and honors.  He is listed in the Best Lawyers in America and as a Washington Super Lawyer, and he recently was recognized by the King County Bar Association as Mentor of the Year.  Earlier in his career, the King County Bar Association named him Outstanding Young Lawyer.  Mr. Angelis served as the editor of the Washington Lawyer’s Practice Manual for many years, and while in law school served as articles editor for the Yale Law Journal and managing editor of the Yale Law & Policy Review

Mr. Angelis is a frequent speaker and presenter on strategic litigation issues, not only related to patent and IP litigation but also legal ethics, privacy for electronic communications, internal investigations, developments in Internet law, and effective litigation strategies. 

Professional Background

  • Clerkship, Hon. Stephen F. Williams, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 1999-2000


  • Listed in Best Lawyers in America (Since 2013)
  • Listed in Washington Super Lawyers (2014–2018)
  • Citizen of the Year (2016) by St. Demetrios Greek Orthodox Church
  • King County Bar Association Mentor of the Year (2012)
  • King County Bar Association’s Outstanding Young Lawyer (2006)
  • Recipient of NWIRP Amicus Award (2011) (awarded to Castillo litigation team)
  • Selected to the Washington Rising Stars List (2004-2009, 2011, 2012)

Professional/Civic Activities

  • Co-Chair, IP Litigation Committee of the Federal Bar Association of the Western District of Washington.
  • Chair, King County Bar Association Fair Campaign Practices Committee
  • Member, King County Bar Association’s Leadership Committee
  • Member, Attorney General’s Task Force on Unaccompanied Children
  • Leadership Tomorrow, Class of 2008

Additional Information

  • Internet and Technology Law – Practical Guidance for the Washington Practitioner (2012)
  • Indian Law, in Washington Lawyers Practice Manual (2012)
  • Rule 11, (with Ramona Emerson) in Washington Civil Procedure Deskbook (2007).
  • “Investing Public Money in Private Markets: What are the Right Questions?,” Framing The Social Security Debate: Values, Economics, & Politics (Douglas Arnold, Michael Graetz, & Alicia Munnel, eds., 1999).
Select Patent litigation
  • Cooper v. Square, Inc. (N.D. Ill., PTAB, Fed. Cir., and S. Ct.).  Theo served as lead counsel for Square in proceedings before the District Court, Federal Circuit, and U.S. Supreme Court, in a case involving mobile payment technology.  He also assisted with proceedings before the PTAB.  Theo obtained a stay of the district court proceedings pending resolution of the PTAB’s ruling, and after the PTAB invalidated all of the asserted claims, Theo successfully defended that ruling on appeal before the Federal Circuit.  Theo subsequently convinced the Supreme Court to deny certiorari after it took the unusual step of ordering Square to respond to Cooper’s cert. petition. 
  • Unwired Planet v. Square (D. Nev. and PTAB).  Theo served as Square’s lead counsel before the U.S. District Court and as co-counsel at the PTAB in a case involving location based technology and wireless network infrastructure.  After discovery and Markman, Theo obtained a stay of the District Court proceedings pending completion of the pending PTAB proceedings.  Theo argued for Square before the PTAB and obtained an order invalidating all asserted claims.  Theo then served as appellate counsel at the Federal Circuit until Unwired Planet abandoned its appeals.
  • Intellicheck Mobilisa, Inc. v. Wizz Systems LLC (W.D. Wash.).  Theo served as lead counsel for plaintiff in a case involving mobile document authentication technology.  Theo obtained a favorable Markman ruling. 
  • Lexos Media IP, LLC v. Recreational Equipment, Inc. (E.D. Tex.).  Theo served as REI’s lead counsel before the U.S. District Court in a case involving ecommerce technology. 
  • Genaville LLC v. Recreational Equipment, Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.).  Theo served as lead counsel for REI in a case involving ecommerce technology. 
  • Coqui v. Nordstrom, Target, and Cabela’s (E.D. Tex.).  Theo served as lead counsel for Nordstrom, Cabela’s, and Target in a case involving electronic gift card technology deployed using mobile devices
  • Cequint Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (D. Del.).  Theo represented Cequint Inc. in asserting claims against Apple, Inc. for infringement of two patents related to Caller ID and wireless infrastructure technology. 
  • Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell (W.D. Pa.).  Theo was part of the team representing Carnegie Mellon University before the U.S. District Court.  The team obtained a trial verdict of $1.17 billion, and the matter subsequently settled for payment of $750 million.  Theo managed all briefing and motions practice during the trial. 
  • Eastman Kodak Co. v. Apple Inc. and Research in Motion (U.S.I.T.C.), (N.D. Tex.), and (W.D.N.Y.).  Theo represented Eastman Kodak Company in asserting claims against Apple, Inc. and Research In Motion (RIM) involving Kodak’s digital capture patents. 
Additional Appellate Experience
  • Panagacos v. Towery (9th Cir.) – Theo represents Army Force Protection Chief Tom Rudd in a Bivens action brought by protesters.  He obtained dismissal of the majority of protestors’ claims  during the initial appeal , and he obtained dismissal of the other claims on summary judgment after remand. 
  • Marina Homeowners Association v. The Stratford At The Marina, LLC (Wash. Ct. App. Div. I).  Theo successfully overturned $2 million judgment entered against client—while represented by other counsel—under the Washington CPA, Washington Condominium Act, and various common law causes of action. 
  • Castillo v. Skwarski et al. (9th Cir. and W.D. Wash.).  Theo represented plaintiff in successful Bivens action against Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”).  The case was settled by the Ninth Circuit Mediator while the government’s appeal was pending.  The settlement included a large monetary payment and written apology, as well as a prior commitment to alter DHS practices.  The settlement led Northwest Immigrants Rights Project to award K&L Gates its Amicus Award for 2011, and the case was featured at the National Hispanic Bar Association’s annual meeting. 
  • United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc. (D.C. Circuit).  Theo represented a major investment bank in analyzing the United States’ RICO action against all major tobacco companies.  Successfully predicted outcome of interlocutory appeal on unsettled RICO remedies issue.
  • Microsoft Corp. v. Synergy6 et al. (Wash. Ct. App Div. I). Theo successfully defeated numerous attempts to obtain interlocutory review of trial court rulings regarding personal jurisdiction, constitutional limits on statutory damages, and discovery rulings.  The case ultimately settled for a $7 million dollar payment to Microsoft, which was the largest payment every in an anti-spam case. 
  • State v. Athan (Wash. Supreme Court).  Represented Washington State Bar Association as amicus curiae arguing that police should not be allowed to pose as a suspect’s lawyer to gather incriminating evidence. 
  • Smith v. Behr Process Corp. (Wash. Ct. App. Div. II).  Represented Behr Process Corporation, as newly appearing appellate counsel, seeking to overturn a default judgment entered as a discovery sanction. 
  • Pro bono appeals.  Regular supervision and participation in pro bono appeals, primarily in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 
Other Constitutional and Governmental Litigation and Advice
  • JEFM v. Lynch (W.D. Wash.).  Represented a class of unaccompanied minors who entered the United States as children and not assigned counsel to represent themselves in Immigration Court.  The class brought Due Process and statutory claims.  The case is pending before the Ninth Circuit on the government’s challenge to the District Court’s jurisdiction to hear the children’s challenge. 
  • Microsoft v. Synerg6, Inc. et al. (King County Super. Ct.).  Successfully defended Microsoft against defamation claims arising from statements made during joint press conference held by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer and Microsoft General Counsel. 
  • Sanders v. City of Seattle (King County Super. Ct.).  Successfully represented Westlake Center and defeated argument that Seattle Monorail’s public easement through Westlake Center was a public forum. 
  • Vanmoor v. Alexa Internet (D.D.C).  Defeated defamation claims against Amazon.com’s Alexa Internet service. 
  • Skagit County v. Samish and Swinomish Tribes (Interior Board of Indian Appeals).  Represented Skagit County in complex land use litigation related to development of lands that tribes sought to convert from fee status to Federal Trust land. 
  • C-Tran.  Represented public transit authority in developing policies for non-commercial advertising on buses and other public transportation. 
  • City of Blaine.  Represented City in resolving claims related to exhumation of native remains during construction of sewage treatment plan on Semiahmoo

Intellectual Property Litigation and Advice
Theo focuses a substantial portion of his practice on intellectual property litigation, with a special emphasis on cyber and technology law.  Mr. Angelis not only represents clients in high profile litigation involving patent, trademark, and copyright infringement, but also provides counseling regarding emerging issues and unsettled legal issues, and pending legislation.  Mr. Angelis provides guidance on all manner of cyberlaw issues and the use and misuse of intellectual property online. Topics of recent consultations include:  agreements and policies related to cloud computing services; possible causes of action against sophisticated hackers; privacy for digital communications, and domain cybersquatting.  Mr. Angelis has also worked with federal, state, and international governmental agencies in the battle against internet misconduct.  He speaks frequently on emerging trends in internet law and challenges inherent in seeking to protect computer systems and intellectual property.  Representative engagements include:

Internet and Cyber Law
  • Represented major cloud computing provider in analysis of key policies and agreements related to cloud services.
  • Represented Microsoft Corporation in nationwide Internet safety and security litigation efforts, including extensive litigation in anti-spam, anti-phishing, anti-spyware, child protection, and related enforcement efforts.
  • Doe v. Project Fair Bid, Inc. (W.D. Wash. 2011).  Served as lead counsel for venture capital funds sued in nationwide class action arising from investments in penny auction website. 
  • Represented anti-spyware software developer—in litigation and disputes in both Europe and the United States—against charges that its software had malicious features.
  • Advised major wireless carrier regarding issues related to wireless updates of software.
  • Advised major smart phone manufacturer in questions related to its social networking.