About Nathan

Nathan Brunette is a partner in the Technology and Intellectual Property practice group. He focuses his practice on patent and intellectual property litigation as well as complex business disputes. He has represented clients in state and federal courts, private arbitration, and Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy proceedings. His experience includes litigating patent, trademark, trade dress, licensing, cybersquatting, trade secret, civil antitrust, and commercial matters. In addition, he counsels clients about the protection, enforcement, and monetization of technology and intellectual property assets in the context of business opportunities and transactions.

Prior to joining Stoel Rives, Nathan clerked for the Honorable Timothy Dyk of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and for the Honorable Deborah Chasanow of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

Expand to Read More + See Less -


Patent Litigation

  • Representation of SnapRays, LLC d/b/a SnapPower in a Section 337 investigation before the International Trade Commission (ITC) seeking a general exclusion order to prevent the importation of products infringing the client’s patents, including multiple direct competitors’ products. Following the hearing in early 2019, the ITC found a violation of Section 337 and entered a general exclusion order that would bar any party from importing infringing products into the United States. Certain Powered Cover Plates, Inv. No. 337-TA-1124.
  • Representation of medical device manufacturer in a patent infringement action. After the court dismissed the case with leave to amend and expedited expert discovery, our team successfully defeated a motion for preliminary injunction seeking to halt all sales of the accused product and won a stay of the litigation pending reexamination. The case subsequently settled.
  • Obtained permanent injunction and judgment on multiple counts of patent infringement, validity, and enforceability in a case involving claims for patent infringement, tortious interference, and unfair competition against an infringing competitor in the public safety space.
  • Representation of a patent licensing business in amicus curiae brief supporting rehearing en banc in a case involving the scope of intervening rights before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Rehearing en banc was granted, and the original panel decision was reversed. Reports credited our team’s brief as the catalyst for the court’s decision to rehear the case.
  • Representation of electronics company against patent infringement claims brought by a non-practicing entity in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware resulting in a negotiated settlement.
  • Representation of designer and manufacturer of recycling handling systems sold worldwide, in a series of three patent infringement and declaratory judgment cases in the Middle District of Tennessee and the Western District of Washington. The court granted our team’s motion to dismiss declaratory judgment claims for lack of personal jurisdiction in Tennessee, and our motion for costs. Our motion to dismiss a patent infringement action in Tennessee was pending when the parties settled the dispute.
  • Representation of commercial property management company in defending patent infringement claims brought by a non-practicing entity in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, resulting in a negotiated settlement.

Trademark and Intellectual Property Litigation

  • Representation of branded supplier of over-the-counter drugs in a series of trademark disputes involving third parties using and attempting to register a variety of confusingly similar marks, including through demand letters, U.S. District Court litigation, an opposition proceeding before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeals Board, and settlement negotiations. Most of the infringing parties agreed to cease infringement without litigation.
  • Obtained preliminary and permanent injunctive relief for insurance company in trademark and cybersquatting litigation against unauthorized seller of merchandise bearing the company’s name and newly launched updated logo. Our team filed litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho, resulting in a settlement, permanent injunction, and transfer of the offending domain name.
  • Representation of emergency medical equipment manufacturer as part of litigation team asserting and defending competing Lanham Act false advertising claims against a direct competitor. The parties ultimately resolved their dispute through a confidential settlement.
  • Obtained preliminary injunctive relief for Troy Healthcare LLC in a trademark and trade dress infringement case brought against Troy’s former distributor, Nutraceutical Corporation, in the Western District of Washington. Our team acted swiftly to obtain an injunction against the defendant’s use of the mark DROPAIN and trade dress confusingly similar to that used with Troy’s STOPAIN® topical analgesic products and requiring a recall of products from resellers nationwide. The case ultimately settled.
  • Representation of Harry and David in a series of disputes asserting that competitors’ use of Harry and David’s trademarks in internet search engine keyword advertising constituted trademark infringement. Results: Most cases settled.
  • Representation of a nationally recognized manufacturing and technology company in a Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy arbitration proceeding against a cybersquatting former distributor, resulting in transfer of the domain name registration to our client.
Expand to Read More + See Less -

Honors & Activities

Professional Honors & Activities

  • Listed in the IAM Patent 1000: The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners, 2023
  • Intellectual Property Owners Association Standing Committee on Discovery, 2012–2013
  • Member, Oregon State Bar sections on Intellectual Property; Litigation; and Antitrust, Trade Regulation, and Unfair Business Practices 

Civic Activities

  • Board Member and Chair of Technology Committee, Friends of the Multnomah County Library, 2011–2014 
Expand to Read More + See Less -
Insights & Presentations

Insights & Presentations

  • “Developments in Patent Law,” Annual Meeting & CLE, Washington State Patent Law Association, 2023
  • Oregon Civil Litigation Training: Depositions, Oregon State Bar, 2015
  • “Patent Litigation” Guest Lectures, Lewis & Clark Law School, Patent Prosecution course, 2011–2013, 2015
  • Author, “Apportionment of Intellectual Property Value: Where Economic Theory Meets Legal Practice” (co-authors Brian C. Park and Drew Voth), The Federal Lawyer, National Federal Bar Association, October/November 2013 
  • Presenter, “Mayo v. Prometheus - Sections 101 and 103,” Stoel University, 2012
  • Former Federal Circuit Law Clerks’ Case Briefing and Oral Advocacy Tips (courtroom presentation immediately preceding U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit oral arguments in Portland, Oregon), 2011
  • Presenter, “Indirect Patent Infringement,” Stoel University, 2011
  • Author, “The America Invents Act Ushers in Changes to Patent Litigation” (co-author, Brian C. Park), The Federal Bar Association News, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Winter 2011 
  • Presenter, “Patent Law Year (2010) in Review,” Oregon State Bar, 2011
  • Presenter, “Patent Law Year (2009) in Review,” Oregon State Bar, 2010 
  • Author, “Shoosmith Bros v. Chesterfield County: When Property Tax Valuation Dumps Unexpected Burdens on Local Land Use Controls,” The State and Local Tax Lawyer, 2005 

Related News & Publications

Expand to Read More + See Less -
Saved Pages

Use the arrows to arrange content.  Download pages as a .pdf file or share links via email..

{{ item.Title }} {{ item.AttorneyPosition }}, {{ item.AttorneyLocation }} , C. {{ item.AttorneyCell }} , P. {{ item.AttorneyPhone }} , F. {{ item.AttorneyFax }} {{ item.TypeText }} Remove
You have no pages saved
            {{ state | json }}