small-logo
ProfessionalsCapabilitiesInsights & NewsCareersLocations
About UsAlumniOpportunity & InclusionPro BonoCorporate Social Responsibility
Stay Connected:
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube
  1. Professionals

Alexander P. Ott

Partner

Washington, DC

+1 202-282-5050

Let's Connect

Email
vCard
LinkedIn
  • Full Bio PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page
  • Overview
  • Experience
  • Credentials
  • Insights & News

Alex is an accomplished patent litigator trusted by leading technology companies to handle their most critical, high-stakes disputes. He advocates for clients before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), federal district courts, the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Widely recognized for his experience in Section 337 investigations, Alex consistently delivers results for clients facing complex matters involving electrical, software, and communications technologies.

As lead and core trial counsel in multiple Section 337 investigations, Alex has steered clients to numerous no-violation determinations—even in the face of bet-the-company exposure. His track record spans investigations of semiconductor, wireless networking, LED, and software technologies, and other advanced technologies. Alex’s command of the ITC’s procedural and substantive framework is unmatched, and he seamlessly manages parallel district court litigation, Federal Circuit appeals, and Customs enforcement challenges arising from Section 337 matters.

Beyond the ITC, Alex is a skilled intellectual property advocate, winning early dismissals and favorable rulings on ineligibility, non-infringement, invalidity, and trade secrets in cases filed across the country. He defends trial victories on appeal and is experienced in briefing and arguing before the Federal Circuit. Alex advises on post-grant proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, drafting and defending petitions for semiconductor and electrical technologies. As a registered patent attorney with an electrical engineering background, he delivers practical, litigation-ready strategies that achieve results

Key Matters

Some of the experience represented below may have been handled at a previous firm.

  • Representing Analog Devices in the District of Massachusetts and Federal Circuit in patent cases regarding semiconductor manufacturing technologies
  • Represented Cricut, Inc. in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC related to crafting machines, including consumer heat presses and cutting machines
  • Represented Koki Holdings (previously Hitachi Koki) in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings regarding portable air spring nailers
  • Represented Analog Devices in the District of Massachusetts and First Circuit in a trade secrets and breach of contract case regarding thermoelectric cooler controllers
  • Represented Feit Electric Co. in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC related to filament light-emitting diodes
  • Represented Analog Devices in the Western District of Texas in a patent case regarding Ethernet networking switches
  • Represented Target Corporation in Section 337 investigation at the ITC related to filament light-emitting diodes
  • Represented TCT Mobile International in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent case related to power management techniques for mobile devices
  • Represented Analog Devices and Linear Technology in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC wireless mesh networking devices
  • Representing ZTE Corporation in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC investigation regarding 3G and 4G/LTE networking technologies
  • Representing Koki Holdings (previously Hitachi Koki) in an ITC investigation and Federal Circuit appeals regarding portable air spring nailers
  • Represented Bestway Inflatables in the Eastern District of Texas and seven related inter partes review (IPR) proceedings regarding inflatable airbeds
  • Represented Bestway Inflatables in an ITC investigation regarding inflatable airbeds
  • Represented Samsung Electro-Mechanics in a post-grant review (PGR) proceeding, successfully defending the validity of its patent directed to multilayer ceramic capacitors
  • Represented ZTE Corporation in a breach of FRAND commitment case in the Southern District of New York regarding standard-essential patents (SEPs) directed to 2G, 3G and 4G/LTE networking technologies
  • Represented InSite Vision in the District of Delaware regarding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) eye drops, obtaining early dismissal
  • Represented Diablo Technologies in IPR proceedings regarding memory modules, successfully invalidating two patents based on anticipation and obviousness
  • Represented Autodesk in the District of New Hampshire regarding 3D modeling software for designing HVAC systems, obtaining summary judgment of patent ineligibility under§101 and non-infringement and obtaining affirmance of those decisions in an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • Represented Fairchild Semiconductor in a multi-district patent dispute in the Northern District of California and District of Delaware regarding power conversion circuits
  • Represented Ciena Corporation in a case in the Central District of California regarding fiber optics telecommunication devices
  • Represented Rovi Guides in the District of Delaware and an ITC investigation regarding digital entertainment technologies
  • Represented Spansion in a multi-district patent dispute in the District of Delaware, Eastern District of Virginia, and ITC regarding flash memory circuits

  • Super Lawyers, Washington DC, “Rising Star” in Intellectual Property Litigation, 2014-2020

Capabilities

Intellectual Property
ITC – Section 337
Patent Litigation
Trade Secrets, Non Competes & Restrictive Covenants

Key Matters

Some of the experience represented below may have been handled at a previous firm.

  • Representing Analog Devices in the District of Massachusetts and Federal Circuit in patent cases regarding semiconductor manufacturing technologies
  • Represented Cricut, Inc. in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC related to crafting machines, including consumer heat presses and cutting machines
  • Represented Koki Holdings (previously Hitachi Koki) in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings regarding portable air spring nailers
  • Represented Analog Devices in the District of Massachusetts and First Circuit in a trade secrets and breach of contract case regarding thermoelectric cooler controllers
  • Represented Feit Electric Co. in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC related to filament light-emitting diodes
  • Represented Analog Devices in the Western District of Texas in a patent case regarding Ethernet networking switches
  • Represented Target Corporation in Section 337 investigation at the ITC related to filament light-emitting diodes
  • Represented TCT Mobile International in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent case related to power management techniques for mobile devices
  • Represented Analog Devices and Linear Technology in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC wireless mesh networking devices
  • Representing ZTE Corporation in a Section 337 investigation at the ITC investigation regarding 3G and 4G/LTE networking technologies
  • Representing Koki Holdings (previously Hitachi Koki) in an ITC investigation and Federal Circuit appeals regarding portable air spring nailers
  • Represented Bestway Inflatables in the Eastern District of Texas and seven related inter partes review (IPR) proceedings regarding inflatable airbeds
  • Represented Bestway Inflatables in an ITC investigation regarding inflatable airbeds
  • Represented Samsung Electro-Mechanics in a post-grant review (PGR) proceeding, successfully defending the validity of its patent directed to multilayer ceramic capacitors
  • Represented ZTE Corporation in a breach of FRAND commitment case in the Southern District of New York regarding standard-essential patents (SEPs) directed to 2G, 3G and 4G/LTE networking technologies
  • Represented InSite Vision in the District of Delaware regarding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) eye drops, obtaining early dismissal
  • Represented Diablo Technologies in IPR proceedings regarding memory modules, successfully invalidating two patents based on anticipation and obviousness
  • Represented Autodesk in the District of New Hampshire regarding 3D modeling software for designing HVAC systems, obtaining summary judgment of patent ineligibility under§101 and non-infringement and obtaining affirmance of those decisions in an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • Represented Fairchild Semiconductor in a multi-district patent dispute in the Northern District of California and District of Delaware regarding power conversion circuits
  • Represented Ciena Corporation in a case in the Central District of California regarding fiber optics telecommunication devices
  • Represented Rovi Guides in the District of Delaware and an ITC investigation regarding digital entertainment technologies
  • Represented Spansion in a multi-district patent dispute in the District of Delaware, Eastern District of Virginia, and ITC regarding flash memory circuits

Credentials

Education

Alex earned his J.D., cum laude, from Tulane University Law School in 2010, where he was an editor of the Tulane Law Review. Alex received his B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology in 2005.

    Related Insights & News

    • “A New Vision: Collateral Estoppel Doesn’t Extend to Related Claims,” IP Update, Sept. 19, 2024
    • “Later-Filed, Earlier-Expiring Patent Not an ODP Reference,” IP Update, Aug. 29, 2024
    • “Section 337 Doesn’t Require Article III Standing for Claimant but Claimant Must Be ‘Patentee’,” IP Update, May 30, 2024
    • “Stud-y Harder: Domestic Industry Must Be Established for Each Asserted Patent,” IP Update, May 16, 2024
    • “ITC Shines Light on DI: Complainant Can’t Aggregate Investments Across Patents, Prongs,” IP Update, April 11, 2024
    • “R&D Expenditures Need Only Relate to Subset of Domestic Industry Product,” IP Update, Feb. 01, 2024
    • “Mootness Requires Covenant Not to Sue to Be Unconditional and Irrevocable,” IP Update, June 30, 2023
    • “No Smoking Gun Here: Soliciting Input Sufficient to Satisfy Commission’s Statutory Obligation,” IP Update, April 06, 2023
    • “Threat of ITC Exclusion Order Is Too Speculative to Constitute Irreparable Harm,” IP Update, July 21, 2022
    • “Patent Invalidity Doesn’t Demonstrate Good Faith for Consent Order Violation,” IP Update, March 10, 2022
    Press Release
    Winston Expands IP Practice with ITC Partner Alexander Ott

    April 1, 2026

    View All Insights & News

    Capabilities

    Intellectual Property
    ITC – Section 337
    Patent Litigation
    Trade Secrets, Non Competes & Restrictive Covenants
    Logo
    facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube

    Copyright © 2026. Winston & Strawn LLP

    AlumniCorporate Transparency Act Task ForceDEI Compliance Task ForceEqual Rights AmendmentLaw GlossaryThe Oval UpdateWinston MinutePrivacy PolicyCookie PolicyFraud & Scam AlertsNoticesSubscribeAttorney Advertising