Bryan Conley is an experienced litigator focusing his practice on intellectual property matters at the agency, trial and appellate levels. He regularly represents high profile technology clients at trial concerning their most challenging patent matters.

Bryan’s practice encompasses all facets of litigation strategy and procedure, including pre-suit investigation, fact and expert discovery, trial, and appeal. He also represents clients in inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR) proceedings, including ensuring that such proceedings align with overall litigation strategy.

Bryan aims to make technologically and legally complicated intellectual property cases understandable for juries and judges. He has experience involving a variety of technologies, including semiconductors, smartphones, cellular and wireless communications, high speed data transceivers, electrical connectors, speakers, user interfaces, and magnetic recording media.

Prior to joining Wolf Greenfield, Bryan served as Counsel in the IP litigation group at WilmerHale, where he represented clients in a variety of industries, including semiconductors and mobile devices, in multifaceted cases across the country

Bryan is committed to pro bono work. His pro bono work includes representing a death row inmate in post­conviction Rule 32 proceedings before the Alabama Circuit Court, which resulted in a sentence reduction from a death sentence to life in prison without parole.

While in law school, Bryan served as a student attorney with the Suffolk Defenders Clinical Program, where he represented indigent clients in a range of criminal proceedings in district court. In addition to his work with the Suffolk Defenders, Bryan was a judicial intern for the Honorable Scott L. Kafker of the Massachusetts Appeals Court. He was a note editor of the Suffolk University Law Review and captain of the 2006 National Constitutional Law Moot Court national championship team.

ITC Litigation

  • Represent Amphenol before the United States International Trade Commission in multi-patent litigation involving electrical connectors (Certain Electrical Connectors and Cages, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, 337-TA-1241).
  • Represented Sony before the United States International Trade Commission in multiple patent litigations involving magnetic tape media (Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same, 337-TA-1012; Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same (II), 337-TA-1076).
  • Represented Apple before the United States International Trade Commission in multi-patent litigation involving wireless technology (Certain Wireless Standard Compliant Electronic Devices, Including Communication Devices and Tablet Computers, 337-TA-953).
  • Represented Intel, Apple, and HP before the United States International Trade Commission in multi-patent litigation involving semiconductor technology; resulted in favorable Initial and Commission Determinations of no violation (Certain Microprocessors, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, 337­-TA-­781); Commission decision of no violation upheld on appeal (X2Y Attenuators, LLC  v. Int’l Trade Comm’n (2013-1340)).
  • Represented Apple before the United States International Trade Commission in multiple patent litigations involving mobile device technology (Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers, 337-­TA-­701; Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Mobile Tablets, Portable Music Players, and Computers, and Components Thereof, 337-­TA­-771).

District Court Litigation

  • Represent Burton before the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado in patent litigation involving helmet technology (Smith Sport Optics, Inc. et al. v The Burton Corporation, Case No. 21­-cv-­2112-­CMA (D. Colo.)).
  • Represented Gimlet and Spotify in trademark litigation before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; resulted in summary judgment of no trademark infringement (Reply All Corp. v Gimlet Media, Inc., Case No. 15-­cv-­04950­-WFK (E.D.N.Y)); affirmed on appeal (No. 2020-952).
  • Represented Apple in a single-­patent litigation related to memory disambiguation in out-­of-­order execution microprocessors before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc., Case No. 14­-cv-­062­-WMC (W.D. Wisc.)).
  • Represented Apple in a two-­patent litigation related to speaker technology before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (THX, Ltd. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 13-­cv-­01161-­HSG (N.D. Cal.)); in related IPR proceedings (No. IPR2014-­235) and subsequent appeal (Nos. 2015­-2038,-­2039).
  • Represented Intel in litigation involving several patents related to plasma processing before the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts; resulted in stay pending IPR and subsequent settlement (Zond, Inc. v. Intel Corp., Case No. 13-­cv­-11570-­RGS (D. Mass.)).
  • Represented Apple in a multi-­patent litigation related to cellular technology before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L., Apple Inc., Case No. 12-­cv-­100­-JRG-­JDL (E.D. Tex.)).
  • Represented Broadcom in litigation involving several patents related to high-­speed networking devices used in data centers before the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California; resulted in injunction against competitor following favorable jury trial (Broadcom Corp. v. Emulex Corp., Case No. 09­-1058­-JVS­-AN (C.D. Cal.)) and successful appeal (No. 12­-1309).
  • Represented Apple before the U.S. District Court of the District of Delaware in multi-patent litigation related to cellular technology (Nokia Corp. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 09-­cv­-00791-­GMS (D. Del.).
  • Represented Intel in a single-­patent litigation related to memory disambiguation in out­-of­-order execution microprocessors before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Intel Corp., Case No. 08-­cv-­078-­BBC (W.D. Wisc.)).
  • Represented GSK in ANDA litigation involving patent related to anticoagulant before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; resulted in enjoinment of defendants’ ANDA approval following favorable bench trial (Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation et al v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., Case No.1:07-­cv-­11614-­JGK (S.D.N.Y.)).
  • Represented Proctor & Gamble in trademark and unfair competition litigation involving paper towel products (The Proctor & Gamble Company v. Georgia­Pacific Consumer Products LP, Case No. 09­-cv-­318 (S.D. Ohio)).
  • Represented Cynosure in a complex commercial litigation involving fraud, negligent misrepresentation, civil conspiracy, and various state consumer protection and franchise act claims before the U.S. District Court of the District of Minnesota; resulted in successful motion to dismiss, and subsequent termination (Ronald Berglund et al. v. Cynosure, Inc., Case No. 06­-3901 ADM (D. Minn.)).

Pro Bono

  • Represented petitioner, a death row inmate, in post­-conviction Rule 32 proceeding before the Alabama Circuit Court; resulted in reduction of sentence from a death sentence to life in prison without parole (John Lionel Neal, Jr. v. State of Alabama, Case No. CC-­87-520.60).

Bryan is a member of the Alan D. Lourie Boston Intellectual Property American Inn of Court, as well as the Boston Patent Law Association (BPLA).

Bryan is a also member of the Boston Bar Association (BBA) and a member of the Boston Bar Foundation (BBF) Society of Fellows, and has held leadership positions in both organizations. As a member of the BBF Young Lawyers Advisory Committee, Bryan previously served on the BBF Junior Fellows Committee. Bryan also served on the BBA's Criminal Law Section Steering Committee and was co­-chair of the Public Policy Subcommittee. He was also selected by the  BBA as a member of the BBA's Public Interest Leadership Program (PILP), which recognizes and honors newer lawyers who have demonstrated leadership in their community by engaging in public service, pro bono and organized bar activities.

  • Selected by the Boston Bar Association (BBA) as a member of the BBA's Public Interest Leadership Program (PILP) for the 2007-2008 year
  • Recipient of WilmerHale's 2008 Volunteer Appreciation Award
  • J. Braxton Craven Constitutional Law Moot Court Competition, 2006 National Champion
Expand All

Bryan Conley is an experienced litigator focusing his practice on intellectual property matters at the agency, trial and appellate levels. He regularly represents high profile technology clients at trial concerning their most challenging patent matters.

Bryan’s practice encompasses all facets of litigation strategy and procedure, including pre-suit investigation, fact and expert discovery, trial, and appeal. He also represents clients in inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR) proceedings, including ensuring that such proceedings align with overall litigation strategy.

Bryan aims to make technologically and legally complicated intellectual property cases understandable for juries and judges. He has experience involving a variety of technologies, including semiconductors, smartphones, cellular and wireless communications, high speed data transceivers, electrical connectors, speakers, user interfaces, and magnetic recording media.

Prior to joining Wolf Greenfield, Bryan served as Counsel in the IP litigation group at WilmerHale, where he represented clients in a variety of industries, including semiconductors and mobile devices, in multifaceted cases across the country

Bryan is committed to pro bono work. His pro bono work includes representing a death row inmate in post­conviction Rule 32 proceedings before the Alabama Circuit Court, which resulted in a sentence reduction from a death sentence to life in prison without parole.

While in law school, Bryan served as a student attorney with the Suffolk Defenders Clinical Program, where he represented indigent clients in a range of criminal proceedings in district court. In addition to his work with the Suffolk Defenders, Bryan was a judicial intern for the Honorable Scott L. Kafker of the Massachusetts Appeals Court. He was a note editor of the Suffolk University Law Review and captain of the 2006 National Constitutional Law Moot Court national championship team.

ITC Litigation

  • Represent Amphenol before the United States International Trade Commission in multi-patent litigation involving electrical connectors (Certain Electrical Connectors and Cages, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, 337-TA-1241).
  • Represented Sony before the United States International Trade Commission in multiple patent litigations involving magnetic tape media (Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same, 337-TA-1012; Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same (II), 337-TA-1076).
  • Represented Apple before the United States International Trade Commission in multi-patent litigation involving wireless technology (Certain Wireless Standard Compliant Electronic Devices, Including Communication Devices and Tablet Computers, 337-TA-953).
  • Represented Intel, Apple, and HP before the United States International Trade Commission in multi-patent litigation involving semiconductor technology; resulted in favorable Initial and Commission Determinations of no violation (Certain Microprocessors, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, 337­-TA-­781); Commission decision of no violation upheld on appeal (X2Y Attenuators, LLC  v. Int’l Trade Comm’n (2013-1340)).
  • Represented Apple before the United States International Trade Commission in multiple patent litigations involving mobile device technology (Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers, 337-­TA-­701; Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Mobile Tablets, Portable Music Players, and Computers, and Components Thereof, 337-­TA­-771).

District Court Litigation

  • Represent Burton before the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado in patent litigation involving helmet technology (Smith Sport Optics, Inc. et al. v The Burton Corporation, Case No. 21­-cv-­2112-­CMA (D. Colo.)).
  • Represented Gimlet and Spotify in trademark litigation before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York; resulted in summary judgment of no trademark infringement (Reply All Corp. v Gimlet Media, Inc., Case No. 15-­cv-­04950­-WFK (E.D.N.Y)); affirmed on appeal (No. 2020-952).
  • Represented Apple in a single-­patent litigation related to memory disambiguation in out-­of-­order execution microprocessors before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc., Case No. 14­-cv-­062­-WMC (W.D. Wisc.)).
  • Represented Apple in a two-­patent litigation related to speaker technology before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (THX, Ltd. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 13-­cv-­01161-­HSG (N.D. Cal.)); in related IPR proceedings (No. IPR2014-­235) and subsequent appeal (Nos. 2015­-2038,-­2039).
  • Represented Intel in litigation involving several patents related to plasma processing before the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts; resulted in stay pending IPR and subsequent settlement (Zond, Inc. v. Intel Corp., Case No. 13-­cv­-11570-­RGS (D. Mass.)).
  • Represented Apple in a multi-­patent litigation related to cellular technology before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L., Apple Inc., Case No. 12-­cv-­100­-JRG-­JDL (E.D. Tex.)).
  • Represented Broadcom in litigation involving several patents related to high-­speed networking devices used in data centers before the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California; resulted in injunction against competitor following favorable jury trial (Broadcom Corp. v. Emulex Corp., Case No. 09­-1058­-JVS­-AN (C.D. Cal.)) and successful appeal (No. 12­-1309).
  • Represented Apple before the U.S. District Court of the District of Delaware in multi-patent litigation related to cellular technology (Nokia Corp. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 09-­cv­-00791-­GMS (D. Del.).
  • Represented Intel in a single-­patent litigation related to memory disambiguation in out­-of­-order execution microprocessors before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Intel Corp., Case No. 08-­cv-­078-­BBC (W.D. Wisc.)).
  • Represented GSK in ANDA litigation involving patent related to anticoagulant before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; resulted in enjoinment of defendants’ ANDA approval following favorable bench trial (Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation et al v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., Case No.1:07-­cv-­11614-­JGK (S.D.N.Y.)).
  • Represented Proctor & Gamble in trademark and unfair competition litigation involving paper towel products (The Proctor & Gamble Company v. Georgia­Pacific Consumer Products LP, Case No. 09­-cv-­318 (S.D. Ohio)).
  • Represented Cynosure in a complex commercial litigation involving fraud, negligent misrepresentation, civil conspiracy, and various state consumer protection and franchise act claims before the U.S. District Court of the District of Minnesota; resulted in successful motion to dismiss, and subsequent termination (Ronald Berglund et al. v. Cynosure, Inc., Case No. 06­-3901 ADM (D. Minn.)).

Pro Bono

  • Represented petitioner, a death row inmate, in post­-conviction Rule 32 proceeding before the Alabama Circuit Court; resulted in reduction of sentence from a death sentence to life in prison without parole (John Lionel Neal, Jr. v. State of Alabama, Case No. CC-­87-520.60).

Bryan is a member of the Alan D. Lourie Boston Intellectual Property American Inn of Court, as well as the Boston Patent Law Association (BPLA).

Bryan is a also member of the Boston Bar Association (BBA) and a member of the Boston Bar Foundation (BBF) Society of Fellows, and has held leadership positions in both organizations. As a member of the BBF Young Lawyers Advisory Committee, Bryan previously served on the BBF Junior Fellows Committee. Bryan also served on the BBA's Criminal Law Section Steering Committee and was co­-chair of the Public Policy Subcommittee. He was also selected by the  BBA as a member of the BBA's Public Interest Leadership Program (PILP), which recognizes and honors newer lawyers who have demonstrated leadership in their community by engaging in public service, pro bono and organized bar activities.

  • Selected by the Boston Bar Association (BBA) as a member of the BBA's Public Interest Leadership Program (PILP) for the 2007-2008 year
  • Recipient of WilmerHale's 2008 Volunteer Appreciation Award
  • J. Braxton Craven Constitutional Law Moot Court Competition, 2006 National Champion