Clifford Brazen

//

Clifford Brazen headshot
Clifford Brazen headshot

Clifford Brazen

//

Clients benefit from Cliff’s broad experience litigating complex intellectual property disputes, inter partes review proceedings, and appeals before the Federal Circuit. While Cliff’s experience has primarily focused on patent infringement disputes, he has also litigated trademark, copyright, and trade secret disputes.

Prior to joining Erise, Cliff worked in private practice with a focus on patent prosecution. Clients benefit from Cliff’s dual experience with both patent prosecution and litigation because Cliff considers not only the current IP issue before him, but the impact his advice will have on the client’s broader IP strategy and goals.

Throughout his career, Cliff’s practice has focused on complex, high-technology matters involving a diverse array of technologies, including network communications, telecommunications, software, and mechanical technologies—just to name a few.

Beyond adversarial proceedings, Cliff serves as a comprehensive IP tactician for Erise’s clients. Cliff has conducted IP due diligence, negotiated licenses, crafted terms of use and privacy policies, and created tailored IP training materials for Erise’s clients. In short, Cliff understands that best protecting a client’s IP requires consideration of every facet of their business and IP needs, and has developed the depth of knowledge required to best serve Erise’s clients.

Highlights:

  • On the strength of Cliff’s strategy, Sony won summary judgment of noninfringement, protecting Sony from the plaintiff’s request for nearly $500 million in damages.
  • Cliff was a member of the trial team that secured a unanimous jury verdict of noninfringement for Garmin, whose most popular smartwatches had been accused of infringement.
  • Cliff and the Erise team successfully defended FanDuel from a claim that it was infringing 10 patents by successfully whittling the 10 patents down to a single dependent claim of a single patent, before invalidating that remaining claim under 35 USC § 101. When the Plaintiff appealed, Cliff was a member of the appeal team and was responsible for FanDuel’s briefing. Cliff and the appeal team successfully secured a Rule 36 affirmance from the Federal Circuit.
THOUGHT LEADERSHIP
  • “Plan of Attack: Tips and Tricks for Tackling Preliminary Injunction,” Intellectual Property Magazine, July 2019
  • “Defending Your Startup Against Patent Trolls,” Ingram’s, July 2018
  • “You Didn’t Build That: The Case Against Patentability of Isolated Organisms,” 63 U. Kan. L. Rev. 761, 2015
EDUCATION
  • J.D., University of Kansas School of Law
  • B.S., Metallurgical & Materials Engineering, minor in Bioengineering & Life Sciences, Colorado School of Mines
LICENSES
  • Kansas
  • Colorado (inactive)
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
HONORS
  • Missouri & Kansas Super Lawyers, Rising Star, 2024
  • Best Lawyers in America, Ones to Watch, Litigation, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Patent, and Patent Law, 2022 to 2025
THOUGHT LEADERSHIP
  • “Plan of Attack: Tips and Tricks for Tackling Preliminary Injunction,” Intellectual Property Magazine, July 2019
  • “Defending Your Startup Against Patent Trolls,” Ingram’s, July 2018
  • “You Didn’t Build That: The Case Against Patentability of Isolated Organisms,” 63 U. Kan. L. Rev. 761, 2015
Skip to content