Our Professionals

Education

Court Admissions

Bar Associations

Robert M. Manley

Dallas Office
Principal
Dallas Office

300 Crescent Court
Suite 1500
Dallas, TX 75201
TEL: 214.978.4226 FAX: 214.978.4044
rmanley@mckoolsmith.com

Robert Manley is a Principal in the Dallas office of McKool Smith whose practice deals with complex business and intellectual property litigation. Mr. Manley serves as an adjunct professor of trial advocacy at SMU Law School and serves on the faculties of the Southern and Gulf Coast Regional NITA programs. Mr. Manley founded and chairs the McKool Smith Pro Bono Criminal Trial Program, which provides criminal jury trial counsel to the underprivileged, and he prosecuted cases at the Dallas District Attorney’s Office in 2000.   Mr. Manley regularly litigates against financial institutions, and is Co-Chair of the firm's mortgage-backed securities task force.

Representative Matters

Commercial/Mortgage-Backed Securities/Investment Matters

  • Myklatun et al v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. et al. Robert represented Halliburton in a dispute arising out of a distribution agreement for micro-emulsions used in hydraulic fracturing.
  • ORIX Capital Markets in its capacity as Master Servicer and Special Servicer, et al. v. UBS Warburg Real Estate Securities and UBS PaineWebber. Robert represented holders of mortgage-backed securities in the PaineWebber Acceptance Corporation V Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 1999-C1 in a lawsuit against the securitization’s sponsors, promoters, and loan depositors to recover for the loss in the value of their investments.
  • Talbott, et al. v. Deutsche Bank Securities, DB Alex.Brown Exchange Fund I, L.P., and DC Investment Partners. Robert represented investors in a lawsuit against a Deutsche Bank exchange fund’s sponsors, promoters, asset managers, and officers and directors following the fund’s collapse.
  • Wells Fargo Bank, as Trustee, et al. v. UBS Warburg Real Estate Securities and UBS PaineWebber. Robert represented the trustee and holders of mortgage-backed securities in the Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc. Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 1999-C1 in a lawsuit against the securitization’s sponsors and loan depositors to recover for the loss in the value of their investments.
  • Bailey, et al. v. Shell Oil Company and Exxon Mobil Corporation. Robert represented royalty and overriding royalty interest holders of the McElmo Dome CO2 formation against developers and operators in a lawsuit to recover unpaid royalties.
  • Garst, et al. v. CenturyTel, Inc. Robert represented CenturyTel in a lawsuit brought by shareholders as a result of CenturyTel’s acquisition of the Embarq Corporation.
  • Fidelity Investments v. Las Colinas Land Partnership. Robert represented Fidelity in a suit involving the disputed obligations for developers of the Dallas Fort Worth’s Las Colinas Business Park relating to municipal utility district and other obligations.
  • Monosite v. Northern Telecom, et al. Robert represented Monosite in a trade secrets and tortious interference lawsuit involving proprietary designs and manufacturing processes for cell tower monopoles.
  • In re: AgriBioTech, Inc. Robert represented BearingPoint in an adversary proceeding brought by AgriBioTech’s Bankruptcy Trustee against its officers, directors, auditors, and consultants involving claims that BearingPoint’s four-year nation-wide implementation of Oracle’s ERP caused or contributed to Agribiotech’s insolvency.

Intellectual Property Matters

  • Datatreasury Corporation v. Wells Fargo, et al.  Robert represented Key Bank and Sun Trust Bank in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patents 5,910,988 and 6,032,137 which are generally directed to electronic check presentment. 
  • ConnecTel v. Cisco Systems. Robert represented Cisco in a patent infringement suit involving U.S. Patents 6,016,307; 6,144,641; 6,456,594 and 6,473,404, which are generally directed to multiprotocol telecommunications routing and optimization.
  • Lemelson Educations & Research Foundation v. Pilgrim’s Pride. Robert represented Pilgrim’s Pride in a patent infringement case involving U.S. Patent No. 5,028,318, which is generally directed to the use of spreadsheet to interface, control, and monitor factory automation equipment.
  • Ericsson Inc. v. Harris Corportion.  Robert represented Ericcson in a patent infringement case involving cellular telephony technology for synchronizing and correcting radio signals covered by U.S. Patents 5,428,666; 4,675,111; 4,559,732 and 4,365,338.
  • Lonestar Inventions v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.  Robert represented Freescale in a patent infringement suit involving U.S. patent 5,208,726 generally directed to high capacitance structure in a semiconductor device.
  • Maxim Integrated Products v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.  Robert represented Freescale in a patent infringement case involving U.S. Patents 5,008,615; 5,172,214; 5,200,362; 5,476,816; 5,593,538; 5,776,798; 5,861,347; 4,951,005; 5,081,454; 5,089,722; 5,195,655; 5,434,739; 5,124,632 and 5,946,177 generally directed to the design, packaging and manufacture of semiconductor chips.
  • Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. v. LSI Corporation.  Robert represented Freescale in an investigation before the International Trade Commission involving U.S. Patents 5,775,798; 6,473,349 B1 and 5,467,455 generally directed to packaging and manufacture of semiconductor chips.
  • Raindance Communications, Inc. v. WebEx. Robert represented Raindance in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patents 6,535,909 and 6,621,834, which are generally directed to voice transmission over network protocols and recording and playback of collaborative web browsing sessions.
  • Brilliant Technologies v. InFocus Corp. Robert represented InFocus in an intellectual property licensing dispute covering a projection system with a folded optical path involving U.S. Patent No. 6,859,239.
  • Autobytel, Inc. v. Dealix Corp. Robert represented Autobytel in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patent No. 6,282,517, which is generally directed to the real time communication of purchase requests over the internet.
  • Autobytel, Inc. v. InsWeb, et al. Robert represented Autobytel in a patent infringement dispute involving U.S. Patent No. 6,282,517, which is generally directed to real time communication of purchase requests over the internet.
  • Mediatek, Inc. v. Sanyo Elec. Co., Ltd., et al. Robert represented Mediatek in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patents 5,867,819 and 6,118,486, which are generally directed to audio decoding and the synchronization and processing of multiple formatted video signals.
  • Mediatek v. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. Robert represented Mediatek in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patents 5,867,819 and 6,118,486, which are generally directed to audio decoding and the synchronization and processing of multiple formatted video signals.
  • Applied Biosystems. Robert represented Applied Biosystems in a patent licensing dispute involving the assay of enzymes used in recombinant DNA sequencing.
  • California Innovations v. Igloo Products. Robert represented for Igloo in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patents 6,116,045; 6,067,816; 6,644,063 and 6,481,239 generally directed to cooler manufacture, design and technology.
  • Excentus Corp. v. Safeway, Inc., Blackhawk Network, Blackhawk Marketing and Randall’s. Robert represented Safeway, Blackhawk and Randall’s in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patents 6,321,984; 6,332,128; 6,723,081 and 7,383,204, generally directed to the fuel rewards discount technology and fuel dispenser technology.
  • FotoMedia v. AOL, Yahoo!, Verizon, and Sprint Nextel. Robert represented FotoMedia in a series of patent infringement lawsuits involving U.S. Patents 6,018,774; 6,542,936 and 6,871,231, generally directed to photo sharing and metadata tagging technology.
  • Texas MP3 Technologies, LTD. v. Samsung Electronics, Sandisk and Apple. Robert represented Texas MP3 in a patent infringement lawsuit involving U.S. Patent No. 7,065,417, generally directed to MP3 player technology.

Professional & Community Activities

  • Patrick E. Higginbotham American Inn of Court Barrister
  • National Institute of Trial Advocacy, Gulf Coast Regional Program and Southern Regional Program Faculty
  • Adjunct Professor of trial advocacy at Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law

Awards & Recognition

  • Ranked in the Best Lawyers in America as a leading lawyer in Intellectual Property and Securities Litigation.
  • "AV Preeminent" rated by Martindale-Hubbell
  • Repeatedly named "Best Lawyers Under 40" by D Magazine
  • Repeatedly named a "Texas Super Lawyer" by Texas Monthly Magazine
  • Repeatedly named "Best Lawyers in Dallas" by D Magazine
  • Fellow, Litigation Counsel of America
  • Member, The College of the State Bar of Texas

Articles