- Represented an early pioneer in the natural language processing and machine learning field in its case asserting patents against one of the largest technology companies in the world; helped the client win a verdict of infringement, willful infringement, no invalidity, and damages.
- Represented a leading medical device company that developed a ground-breaking system for spinal surgery in a case against a key competitor; achieved a favorable result for the client at trial.
- Represented a startup founded by a prolific inventor facing a patent suit by a large competitor seeking to destroy the startup before it could reach the commercial stage; achieved a favorable result for the client at trial and on appeal.
- Phone: +1 213 576 2682
- Email: erik.carlson@alston.com
With nearly 15 years of trial experience, Erik Carlson has represented clients before U.S. district courts, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the International Trade Commission, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Erik focuses his practice on patent jury trials involving complex technologies such as spinal surgery systems and other medical devices, natural language processing and machine learning, telecommunications, cryptography, and cloud computing.
Before attending law school, Erik was an aerospace engineer for a major U.S. defense contractor, where he obtained first-hand experience developing complex technology, including infrared targeting pods for fighter jets and image stabilization systems for reconnaissance satellites.
-
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter April 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | April 2025
In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that written description is required for a preamble, labor or capital is significant, and defendants can’t invent a lack of inventorship.
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter April 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | April 2025In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that written description is required for a preamble, labor or capital is significant, and defendants can’t invent a lack of inventorship.
-
Press Release April 8, 2025Alston & Bird Adds IP Litigation Partner Michelle Clark in San FranciscoAlston & Bird has further expanded and strengthened its IP Litigation Group by adding partner Michelle Clark in San Francisco.Press Release April 8, 2025Alston & Bird Adds IP Litigation Partner Michelle Clark in San FranciscoAlston & Bird has further expanded and strengthened its IP Litigation Group by adding partner Michelle Clark in San Francisco.
-
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter March 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | March 2025In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that the Supreme Court knows alternative ways to reach affiliate profits, four patents can’t drive 200, and defendants can’t always rely on their own patents.Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter March 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | March 2025In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that the Supreme Court knows alternative ways to reach affiliate profits, four patents can’t drive 200, and defendants can’t always rely on their own patents.
-
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter February 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | February 2025In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that the Federal Circuit always says never, patent publications can come after the priority date, and warnings aren’t always a safe harbor.Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter February 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | February 2025In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that the Federal Circuit always says never, patent publications can come after the priority date, and warnings aren’t always a safe harbor.
-
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter January 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | January 2025In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that changing a definition has consequences, an apex deposition is allowed if they’re percipient, and analyzing a method claim isn’t analyzing a system claim.Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter January 2025Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | January 2025In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that changing a definition has consequences, an apex deposition is allowed if they’re percipient, and analyzing a method claim isn’t analyzing a system claim.
-
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter December 2024Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | December 2024
In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that district courts have inherent powers, two airports are not alike in dignity, and obviousness inquiries are flexible.
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter December 2024Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | December 2024In the latest edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that district courts have inherent powers, two airports are not alike in dignity, and obviousness inquiries are flexible.
-
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter November 2024Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | November 2024
In the first edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that advice is best coming from counsel, Texas claims jurisdiction over subsidiaries, and a pair of judges definitely recused themselves from an indefiniteness finding.
Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter November 2024Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | November 2024In the first edition of the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, we learn that advice is best coming from counsel, Texas claims jurisdiction over subsidiaries, and a pair of judges definitely recused themselves from an indefiniteness finding.
-
Press Release November 20, 2024Alston & Bird’s Expanding Presence in Southern California Recognized by Los Angeles TimesAlston & Bird was featured in the Los Angeles Times for strengthening the firm’s presence in Southern California in 2024 with the opening of a new office in Century City and a relocation of our downtown Los Angeles office to a stunning new space. The firm’s already strong intellectual property practice was also noted for its growth with the additions of partners Erik Carlson, Theresa Conduah, Olivia Kim, and Edward Poplawski to its offices in Southern California in 2024.Press Release November 20, 2024Alston & Bird’s Expanding Presence in Southern California Recognized by Los Angeles TimesAlston & Bird was featured in the Los Angeles Times for strengthening the firm’s presence in Southern California in 2024 with the opening of a new office in Century City and a relocation of our downtown Los Angeles office to a stunning new space. The firm’s already strong intellectual property practice was also noted for its growth with the additions of partners Erik Carlson, Theresa Conduah, Olivia Kim, and Edward Poplawski to its offices in Southern California in 2024.
-
In the News November 17, 2024Los Angeles Times | Southern California Law Firms Merge and Expand During an Impactful 2024Alston & Bird is noted for opening a new office in Century City, California and recently adding Erik Carlson, Theresa Conduah, Olivia Kim, and Edward Poplawski to the firm’s Los Angeles office.In the News November 17, 2024Los Angeles Times | Southern California Law Firms Merge and Expand During an Impactful 2024Alston & Bird is noted for opening a new office in Century City, California and recently adding Erik Carlson, Theresa Conduah, Olivia Kim, and Edward Poplawski to the firm’s Los Angeles office.
-
Press Release October 11, 2024Alston & Bird Adds Pair of Prominent IP Litigation Partners in Los AngelesAlston & Bird has bolstered its IP Litigation Group with the addition of partners Edward Poplawski and Olivia Kim in the firm’s Los Angeles office. With extensive intellectual property and complex patent litigation experience, Edward and Olivia have practiced together for over 20 years and bring a breadth of knowledge to the firm’s existing bench of strong IP litigators.Press Release October 11, 2024Alston & Bird Adds Pair of Prominent IP Litigation Partners in Los AngelesAlston & Bird has bolstered its IP Litigation Group with the addition of partners Edward Poplawski and Olivia Kim in the firm’s Los Angeles office. With extensive intellectual property and complex patent litigation experience, Edward and Olivia have practiced together for over 20 years and bring a breadth of knowledge to the firm’s existing bench of strong IP litigators.
Bar Admissions
- California
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Education
- Loyola Law School (J.D., 2009)
- Cornell University (M. Eng., 2003)
- Cornell University (B.S., 2002)
Memberships
- Federal Circuit Bar Association
Court Admissions
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. International Trade Commission
- Central District of California
- Northern District of California
- Southern District of California
- District of Delaware
- Southern District of Florida
- Northern District of Illinois
- District of New Jersey
- Northern District of New York
- Southern District of New York
- Northern District of Ohio
- Western District of Pennsylvania
- Eastern District of Texas
- Western District of Texas
- Western District of Washington