Kevin Schubert

Kevin Schubert is a principal in McKool Smith's New York office. He focuses his practice on patent litigation and has helped clients obtain over $1 billion over his career.  For the past 16 years, he has represented both patent owners and defendants in high-stakes patent litigations throughout the United States. 

In 2025, IAM named Kevin as one of the world’s top 300 IP strategists and described him as having a “stellar reputation among his peers” and having secured “major wins for big name clients when the stakes are at their highest.”

Recently, Kevin has been the lead attorney in patent litigations for clients SEVEN Networks and Clear Imaging Research against leading smartphone manufacturers over patented technology in the telecommunications and camera space, respectively.  Kevin has also been the lead attorney for an inventor of a pet product in a dispute with a patent assignee.  Kevin also advises an administrator of a leading patent pool in the video coding space.   

Kevin was also the lead technical attorney for client Hillman in Hy-Ko Products Company LLC v. The Hillman Group, Inc. (E.D. Tex.), where he examined and cross-examined several witnesses regarding key duplication technology at trial.   Kevin also helped obtain trial verdicts of $145 million and $85 million for client Wi-LAN in Wi-LAN v. Apple (S.D. Cal.), respectively, in a patent case related to 4G Voice over LTE (“VoLTE”) technology.

Kevin frequently writes and speaks about Intellectual Property.  He is also is an active participant with the Licensing Executive Society (“LES”) and moderates an annual panel of patent licensing executives at the LES annual event each year. 

Before law school, Kevin worked as a patent examiner in Washington, D.C., at the United States Patent and Trademark Office in the Cryptography department. There, he examined more than 100 patent applications.

District courts:

• Vervain.  Vervain, LLC v. Phison Electronics Corporation, Kingston (W.D. Tex., pending).  Represent plaintiff Vervain in separate actions against Phison and Kingston on patents related to the NAND flash space.
• SEVEN Networks.  SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Motorola Mobility LLC (N.D. Tex., concluded 2024).  Represented plaintiff SEVEN Networks in a patent litigation suit involving 9 patents related to Doze mode and other features in the Android operating system owned by SEVEN Networks.
• Hillman.  Hy-Ko Products Co. v. Hillman Group, Inc. (E.D. Tex., concluded 2022).  Represented defendant Hillman in a patent case related to key copying technology.  The jury returned a verdict of $16 million for Hy-Ko, a fraction of Hy-Ko’s demand.
• AT&T.  IPCom, GmbH & Co. KG v. AT&T Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex., concluded 2022).  Represented defendant AT&T in action accusing certain cellular 3G and 4G base station equipment of patent infringement.
• Wi-LAN. Wi-LAN Inc. v. Apple Inc. (S.D. Cal., concluded 2022). Represented plaintiff Wi-LAN in a patent litigation suit on patents related to Voice over LTE (“VoLTE”) technology.  The jury returned a verdict in favor of Wi-LAN for $145.1 million in 2018 and a separate verdict of $85 million in 2020.
• Clear Imaging.  Clear Imaging Research, LLC v. Samsung (E.D. Tex., concluded 2021).  Represented plaintiff Clear Imaging in a patent litigation suit on six patents owned by Clear Imaging related to camera and digital image processing technology.
• SEVEN Networks.  SEVEN Networks, LLC v. Apple Inc. (E.D. Tex., concluded 2021).  Represented plaintiff SEVEN Networks in a patent litigation suit involving a number of Apple mobile products and services alleged to infringe sixteen patents owned by SEVEN Networks.
• BMC Software. BMC Software Inc. v. ServiceNow Inc. (E.D. Tex., concluded 2014). Represented plaintiff BMC Software in a patent infringement action involving IT management solutions. The case settled out of court before trial.
• Realtime Data. Realtime Data LLC v. CME (S.D.N.Y., concluded 2012). Represented plaintiff Realtime Data in patent infringement litigations involving data compression technology.

Arbitration

• [Inventor] v. [Patent Assignee] [AAA, concluded 2025].  Represented an inventor of a pet product in a dispute before the American Arbitration Association with a patent assignee.

Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit:

• Wi-LAN. Wi-LAN Inc. v. Apple Inc., 2015-1256 (Fed. Cir. 2015). Represented Wi-LAN in an appeal regarding the claim construction of several patent terms.

• Named among the IAM 300: World's Leading IP Strategist (2024, 2025)
• Recognized in Best Lawyers in America as "Ones to Watch" for Commercial and Patent, 2021-2025
• Recognized as a "Rising Star" in New York by Super Lawyers, 2015-2018
• Named among the IAM 300: Global Leading Strategist (2025)