Alston & Bird secured a complete defense victory for GoPro Inc. following a complex federal patent infringement trial and post-trial motion practice. More than 11 years in the making, the triumphant final judgment holds that GoPro has zero liability and all the asserted patent claims are invalid.
The plaintiff – a private-equity-backed, nonpracticing entity – filed its claim for infringement of two purchased patents against GoPro over a decade ago. Before Alston & Bird’s involvement, the court found that certain of GoPro products infringed one claim of the asserted patents but found that the plaintiff would need to prove the validity of the claim and damages at trial. Alston & Bird took over GoPro’s defense shortly before trial and secured a jury verdict of no infringement of the unadjudicated products and invalidity of two of the three asserted claims.
On May 14, 2026, Northern District of California Judge William Orrick granted GoPro’s post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law and held the sole remaining claim at issue to be invalid as obvious. The court also denied the plaintiff’s motions for new trial and judgment as a matter of law in their entirety. In his order, Judge Orrick found that GoPro’s evidence of obviousness was “substantial” and “unrebutted.” Because the patents are invalid, the court concluded, GoPro cannot be liable for any infringement or damages.
This is the latest in a series of successful outcomes secured by Alston & Bird’s patent litigators. Partners John Haynes, Michelle Clark, and Phil Ducker oversaw the team and the trial, which included senior associates Karlee Wroblewski, Elliott Riches, and Sloane Kyrazis and associate Madelaine Wieland (Intellectual Property Litigation and Patent Litigation). Michelle Clark argued the successful motion for judgment as a matter of law.