Direct Line: (214) 888-4852
2121 N. Pearl St.
Dallas, Texas 75201
- EducationUniversity of Virginia School of Law
Virginia Law & Business Review
Illinois State University
B.S. in Business Administration, 2009, summa cum laude
Warren McCarty is a skilled trial lawyer with significant experience litigating high-stakes cases in courtrooms across the country. Mr. McCarty advocates for a diverse array of clients, from individual plaintiffs and budding startups to large publicly traded technology companies. His experience spans patent and copyright disputes, class actions, trade secret cases, and competitor litigation.
Mr. McCarty’s track record demonstrates expertise in all phases of litigation, often in cases involving highly technical subject matter. He is frequently called on by clients to examine the other side’s lead technical expert, has examined and defended witnesses relating to standard essential patents and standards procedure, and has successfully presented closing arguments in the courtroom and at arbitration in intellectual property cases. Mr. McCarty has a unique ability to translate diligence and critical thinking into successful outcomes for clients.
While representing plaintiffs, Mr. McCarty has been a member of small trial teams that have won over $1 billion in jury verdicts. Mr. McCarty has also successfully defended a number of large technology companies. In late 2020, Mr. McCarty argued for and won a complete defense victory on behalf of World Programming Limited in a high-stakes patent and copyright case brought by SAS Institute Inc. He is recognized on the exclusive Texas Rising Stars list of the state’s top young lawyers for his work in intellectual property cases.
Mr. McCarty is admitted to practice before the U.S. District Courts for the Northern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Texas, as well as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He also is admitted to the Illinois and Texas bars. His experience spans across the United States, having litigated cases in federal courts in states such as California, Delaware, Texas, and Arizona.
Mr. McCarty received his legal training from the University of Virginia School of Law, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Virginia Law & Business Review and interned for the Hon. Frederick J. Kapala in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Prior to his legal studies, Mr. McCarty earned his degree in Business Administration, summa cum laude, from Illinois State University, where he was also a member of the varsity football team. As an undergraduate, Mr. McCarty received numerous awards for his academic achievements, including the W.E. Ruebush Endowed Scholarship for academic excellence and the President’s Council Academic Award from the Missouri Valley Football Conference.
Mr. McCarty started his career in the litigation department at Winston & Strawn in Chicago, where he assisted in litigating a variety of trial and appellate matters.
- SAS Institute Inc. v. World Programming Limited, et al.The firm defended World Programming Limited, YUM! Brands, Inc., Luminex Software, Inc., Pizza Hut, Inc., and Shaw Industries Group, Inc., in a high-profile copyright and patent case filed by SAS Institute in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuit alleged that World Programming’s analytics software infringes intellectual property owned by SAS Institute. This was the latest in a decade-long string of lawsuits that SAS Institute has brought against its direct competitor, World Programming. In Fall 2020, the firm obtained a complete defense victory. On the eve of trial, the district court sided with World Programming and dismissed SAS Institute’s case with prejudice. Firm attorneys continue to represent World Programming in SAS Institute’s appeal to the Federal Circuit.
- Texas InstrumentsWarren represents TI in a number of patent infringement disputes in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas.
- VirnetX, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.Caldwell Cassady & Curry represents VirnetX in the company’s patent infringement litigation against technology giant Apple Inc. In a dispute that the Eastern District of Texas trial court said has attained Dickensian proportions, Caldwell Cassady & Curry has helped VirnetX win favorable verdicts in five separate trials where each jury awarded over $300 million in damages.
In late 2012, we helped VirnetX win a $368 million verdict when a federal jury determined that Apple had infringed four VirnetX patents to produce the VPN On Demand and FaceTime features in the popular iPhone and other Apple products.
After the case was sent back for a new trial on damages, we won again by securing a $625 million verdict for VirnetX in February 2016 after jurors in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas found that Apple continued to infringe VirnetX’s patents following the first trial to produce the FaceTime and re-designed VPN On Demand features. The jury also found that Apple’s infringement was willful regarding FaceTime and VPN on Demand.
The court later vacated its order to consolidate the matters and set the cases for two separate jury trials focusing on different versions of Apple features.
In the first new trial heard in September 2016 pertaining to the earlier generations of products, we helped VirnetX win a $302 million verdict against Apple before a new Eastern District jury. The verdict was entered as a $439.7 million judgment in September 2017 and affirmed on appeal by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In the second new trial heard in April 2018 addressing the newer generations of products, a different Eastern District jury awarded a unanimous verdict of $502.6 million in favor of VirnetX after finding Apple’s infringement was willful. After that verdict was sent back for a new trial on damages, a final trial was held in Fall 2020, again in the Eastern District of Texas. In that trial, we secured a $502.8 million jury verdict following the Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the 2018 finding that Apple’s VPN On Demand in iOS versions 7.0 and later infringed VirnetX’s patents. The district court later denied Apple’s request for a new trial and entered the jury’s verdict in favor of VirnetX as a final judgment.
- Continental Circuits LLC v. Intel Corporation, et al. The firm represented plaintiff Continental Circuits in its patent infringement case against Intel Corporation and its Japanese supplier, Ibiden. The lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona involved Intel’s semiconductor packaging products. Midway through the litigation, the firm successfully appealed a claim construction to the Federal Circuit, which reversed the district court’s decision and found in favor of Continental Circuits. On remand, the parties resolved the dispute prior to trial.
- Grace, et al. v. Apple Inc.Firm attorneys represented a class of plaintiffs in a high-profile consumer class action case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California based on allegations that Apple Inc. intentionally broke the popular FaceTime video chat feature for millions of customers. The firm successfully defended the affected customers against Apple’s multiple attempts to dismiss the case and helped secure class certification for all California class plaintiffs in 2018. After the District Court denied Apple’s pre-trial Motion for Summary Judgment, the case settled on favorable terms.
- VirnetX, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.Warren represented VirnetX in its recent patent infringement action against Microsoft involving virtual private network technology. After a jury a jury awarded VirnetX $105 million in 2011, Warren represented VirnetX in a subsequent action in the Eastern District of Texas related to Microsoft’s Skype technology. The case settled on confidential terms in late 2014.
- Cellular Communications Equipment LLC v. Apple Inc. Caldwell Cassady & Curry represented Cellular Communications Equipment LLC in a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple Inc. over a network technology patent. Following a trial heard in September 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, jurors found Apple to be a willful infringer and awarded a $22 million verdict in favor of CCE. The award represented a running royalty on Apple’s infringement through March 2016.
- Smartflash LLC v. Apple, Inc. et al. and Smartflash LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. The firm represented Smartflash in its patent infringement actions involving the company’s data storage and access system patents against Apple’s iTunes store and the Google Play feature in Samsung and HTC products.