Nathan Sabri

People

Partner

San Francisco

Print bio

415.344.7042 direct

NSabri@perkinscoie.com

Notice

Before proceeding, please note: If you are not a current client of Perkins Coie, please do not include any information in this e-mail that you or someone else considers to be of a confidential or secret nature. Perkins Coie has no duty to keep confidential any of the information you provide. Neither the transmission nor receipt of your information is considered a request for legal advice, securing or retaining a lawyer. An attorney-client relationship with Perkins Coie or any lawyer at Perkins Coie is not established until and unless Perkins Coie agrees to such a relationship as memorialized in a separate writing.

vCard

Nate is an intellectual property trial lawyer and has tried cases in industries ranging from smartphone hardware, software, and design to network security, for both plaintiffs and defendants.

Nate Sabri assists clients with their most difficult patent, copyright, and trademark issues in a wide range of technology areas, including blockchain, video games, touch technology software and hardware, and semiconductors.

Nate’s successes include high-profile smartphone cases that led to four jury verdicts totaling over $1 billion and multiple successful trials defending a global network security software company against patent infringement claims. He has also obtained numerous wins in advance of trial, including a complete summary judgment victory confirming patent ownership for a leading web services provider and a motion to dismiss a patent infringement action for lack of standing a few months before trial for a major technology company.

Nate is also the Pro Bono Chair for Perkins Coie’s San Francisco office. In his own active pro bono practice, Nate won asylum for a transgender refugee who was forced to flee her native country, successfully obtained parole for a domestic violence victim serving a sentence for a crime against her abuser, and defended a nonprofit human rights organization against allegations of trademark infringement related to the organization’s use of a parody logo, among many others.