- J.D., Syracuse University College of Law, magna cum laude; Syracuse Law Review
- B.S., Electrical Engineering, University of Arizona
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- All Minnesota State Courts
Niall has litigated complex patent and trade secret cases throughout the United States, including cases involving combustion engines, snowmobile design, medical devices, including interventional cardiology technologies and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), internet-based tracking systems, e-commerce, computer hardware and software technologies, and telecommunications systems. He has also litigated commercial cases involving breach of contract, non-disclosure/confidentiality (NDA) agreements, non-compete agreements, and intellectual property licenses in federal and state courts.
Niall has extensive experience in all aspects of complex technical cases from initial investigation to strategy to complex discovery to winning at trial. He has successfully argued summary judgment motions and patent claim constructions, and deposed numerous technical expert witnesses, inventors, engineers, and company executives. Niall has also argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the court where all patent appeals go).
Niall was lead trial counsel in a three-week patent trial in November-December 2017, where the jury returned a verdict for his client Arctic Cat (a Textron subsidiary) in a lawsuit brought by rival Bombardier Recreational Products. Niall successfully argued for Arctic Cat on the appeal of the jury verdict by Bombardier, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Judgment and jury verdict for Niall’s client Arctic Cat.
- "New Patent Law and Trends After SAS v. Iancu," Bloomberg Law, June 2020 (author)
- "The Top Ten Federal District Court Patent Cases of 2018-19," The IP Book, 17th ed., September 2019 (author)
- “Top 10 Patent Litigation Results,” The IP Book, 16th ed., September 2018 (author)
- “TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods: The U.S. Supreme Court Reinvents Patent Litigation Venue,” The IP Book, 15th ed., September 2017 (author)
- Trial counsel representing GE MDS (a General Electric Company subsidiary) in the District of Delaware. The patent technology in the case relates to cellular systems involving error rate dependent controls.
- Appellate counsel arguing for Arctic Cat (at Textron subsidiary) in Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. et al. v. Arctic Cat Inc. et al., 785 Fed.Appx. 858 (Fed. Cir. 2019). Bombardier appealed from a jury verdict in favor of Arctic Cat. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the jury verdict and post-trial rulings in Arctic Cat’s favor that Bombardier’s patents were invalid on multiple grounds.
- Inter Partes Review (IPR) counsel representing AnywhereCommerce in IPR petitions filed by Square, Inc. AnywhereCommerce’s patents relate to mobile payment systems.
- Trial counsel representing AnywhereCommerce in the Northern District of California. AnywhereCommerce asserts that Square, Inc. infringes eight (8) of AnywhereCommerce’s patents related to mobile payment systems.
- Trial counsel representing Arctic Cat in Bombardier Recreational Products v. Arctic Cat (D. Minnesota). Bombardier alleged that numerous model years of Arctic Cat’s snowmobiles infringed two different Bombardier patents. After a three week trial, the jury returned a verdict in Arctic Cat’s favor finding that both Bombardier patents were invalid on multiple grounds.
- Trial counsel representing Arctic Cat in Arctic Cat v. Bombardier Recreational Products (S.D. Florida). A jury found that Bombardier willfully infringed two Arctic Cat patents related to controlled-thrust steering technology for personal watercraft (PWC). Based upon sales of Bombardier’s Sea-Doo PWC, damages in excess of $46 million were awarded to Arctic Cat by the jury.
- Trial counsel for publicly traded Canadian medical device manufacturer accused of trade secret misappropriation.
- Trial counsel for defendant in patent and trademark case obtaining summary judgment of patent non-infringement and invalidity, and also on trademark infringement claims. See Ductcap v. J&S Fabrication et al., No. 10-CV-110 (E.D. Wisconsin), 2013 U.S. Dist. Lexis 20969.
- Represented a major power sports manufacturer in litigation instituted in the International Trade Commission against a foreign competitor in a case involving engine-control technology.
- Trial counsel for a defendant in multi-defendant suit Clear With Computers v. Astec et al. in Eastern District of Texas. Plaintiff Clear With Computers agreed to dismiss case against Niall’s client prior to claim construction.
- Trial counsel for Fortune 500 medical device manufacturer in patent infringement case relating to magnetic resonance imaging technologies.
- Trial counsel in TVI v. Microsoft (N.D. Cal.). TVI is the owner of several patents covering the “autoplay” feature of Windows. TVI sued Microsoft in the Northern District of California alleging that all versions of Microsoft Windows since Windows 95 infringed these patents. The case settled in October 2005 a little more than one week before trial. Microsoft took a license under the patents. All other terms of the settlement are confidential.
- Trial counsel for Fortune 500 medical device manufacturer in patent infringement cases relating to coronary catheters and stents.
- Minnesota Lawyer, "Arctic Cat's Winning Team" Attorney of the Year, 2018
- Minnesota Super Lawyers®, 2011-2014