1. Home
  2. People
  3. Pearce, T. Vann

T. Vann Pearce, Jr.

Partner

Washington, D.C.

Vann Pearce is a trial lawyer who represents leading technology companies in patent infringement litigation and other complex intellectual property and business disputes. Recently, he won two eight-figure jury verdicts for plaintiffs against competitors. Equally skilled in defense, Vann regularly helps clients efficiently and effectively defeat and resolve claims, including securing several “walk-away” resolutions in competitor disputes. As lead counsel in more than 20 cases, he has represented clients ranging from start-ups to publicly traded multinational corporations. His many long-term, repeat clients rely on Vann for his practical advice and complete dedication to solving their most pressing challenges.

Vann litigates in forums throughout the country. He has won several inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. He has secured favorable jury verdicts in Federal and state courts in Delaware, Florida, Maryland, and Texas. Multiple wins on behalf of his clients at the U.S. International Trade Commission in Section 337 investigations have earned recognition with “Disputes Deal of the Year” awards. And he has crafted winning strategies and briefs in precedent-setting Federal Circuit appeals.  

A chemical engineer by training, Vann is a member of the Patent Bar. His representations involve a broad range of technology fields, including semiconductors, artificial intelligence, consumer electronics, 3D printing, automotive technologies, digital imaging, cryptocurrency, and batteries. His clients are based worldwide, including a significant portion from Japan and China. Vann frequently travels to Asia to speak on key developments in intellectual property law.

Patent infringement litigation is central to Vann’s practice, but he also has handled breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation, antitrust, tortious interference, false advertising, civil theft, and bankruptcy matters. Many of his matters involve a complex mix of claims and counterclaims across legal disciplines, where he employs his strategic judgment to navigate competing risks.

While his practice focuses on litigation and dispute resolution, Vann also advices clients on patent licensing, portfolio development, and intellectual property due diligence. Vann co-founded Orrick’s cross-practice 3D printing initiative.

Vann has served the Firm in key leadership roles. In 2022-2023, Vann served as the Chief Practice Officer for the firm's IP & Litigation Business Units, which comprise nearly 400 attorneys globally. His responsibilities included oversight of the units' financial performance, business planning and execution, and lawyer recruiting. Vann also previously served as the firm’s U.S. Law School Hiring Partner, overseeing entry-level hiring nationwide.

    • Continuous Composites, Inc. v. MarkForged, Inc. (D. Del.). Vann was trial counsel for Continuous Composites in its win against a competitor in a patent infringement lawsuit involving 3D printing technology. Vann handled all aspects of the damages case, including direct and cross examination of expert and fact witnesses at trial. The jury awarded over $17.3 million in past damages, over 90% of our client's damages request. The Orrick team's victory was recognized in the American Lawyer's Litigators of the Week feature. https://www.orrick.com/en/News/2024/04/Continuous-Composites-Wins-17-Million-in-Damages-in-Patent-Infringement-Trial
    • Carnival Corp. v. DeCurtis Corp. (S.D. Fl.). Vann was lead counsel for Carnival through summary judgment in this litigation involving breach of contract, patent infringement, trade secret, antitrust, and tort claims related to Carnival's novel OceanMedallion™ guest engagement system. The Orrick team led by Vann won summary judgment on all claims for damages asserted against Carnival  (antitrust, unfair competition, and tortious interference) as well as all claims that Carnival defrauded the Patent Office. Vann then was a member of the two trial teams that first obtained a $21 million jury verdict for breach of contract and patent infringement and then obtained an injunction in a separate bench trial in a different court. Vann cross-examined the opposing party’s CEO and COO at trial. The Orrick team’s victory in the first trial was recognized in  the American Lawyer's Litigators of the Week feature. https://www.orrick.com/en/News/2023/03/Carnival-Corporation-Wins-21-Million-Judgment-in-Patent-Infringement-and-Breach-of-Contract-Trial
    • Fujifilm Corp. v. Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG (D.D.C., PTAB, Fed. Cir.). Vann was lead counsel for Fujifilm in two inter partes review proceedings, and co-counsel in a related district court litigation, in a case involving digital camera and USB technology. The Orrick team led by Vann obtained a final decision, through appeal, ruling all asserted claims unpatentable in both IPRs. The matter was resolved shortly afterwards.
    • Panasonic Corp. v. Cellspin Soft, Inc. (N.D. Cal. and PTAB). Vann was lead counsel for Panasonic in an inter partes review proceeding and a related district court litigation involving Bluetooth and mobile app technology. The Orrick team led by Vann obtained a final decision, through appeal, ruling all asserted claims unpatentable.
    • Corydoras Technologies LLC v. Best Buy Co., Inc. (E.D. Texas). Vann was lead counsel for Best Buy and several of its suppliers in this patent infringement litigation involving mobile phone, tablet, and laptop technology. The matter was resolved during claim construction.
    • In the Matter of Certain Modular LED Display Panels and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1114. Vann represented three Chinese respondents in an ITC Section 337 investigation. The complainant voluntarily withdrew its complaint and terminated the investigation during expert discovery. Asian-mena Counsel Magazine recognized this matter as its “Disputes Deal of the Year.”
    • In the Matter of Certain Liquid Crystal e-Writers and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1035. Vann represented respondent Shenzhen Howshow Technology in an ITC Section 337 investigation. The complainant voluntarily withdrew its complaint and terminated the investigation during fact discovery. China Business Law Journal recognized this matter as a “Disputes and Investigations Deal of the Year.”
    • Desktop Metal, Inc. v. Markforged, Inc. (D. Mass.). Vann represented leading 3D printer manufacturer Desktop Metal in litigation against a competitor involving claims of patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and breach of fiduciary duty. The matter was resolved during trial.
    • Vann represented a leading technology company in several appellate matters against a competitor involving patents related to touchscreen and wireless communication technology. In the first of these matters, the Federal Circuit overturned ITC rulings that one of our client’s key patents was both anticipated and obvious, and reversed the dispositive claim construction on a second patent. Law360 recognized the Orrick team, including Vann, as “Legal Lions” for this victory (August 8, 2013). In another case, he was instrumental in our client’s successful effort to reverse an unfavorable claim construction on a patent covering touchscreen control functionality.

Insights

News