Unrivaled 2025: Michael T. Renaud of Mintz, Levin

You scored a key win in Advanced Micro Devices, et al. v. TCL Communications, et. al, at the International Trade Commission in January 2024. In this patent infringement case for US chipmaker AMD, the company alleged that TCL, an electronics maker, and Realtek Semiconductor Corp., a chip supplier, violated chip patents related to graphic processing units. You obtained cease-and-desist and limited exclusion orders against TCL that barred importation of the products at issue from China. Can you tell us about your strategy in this case?

Mintz’s team has handled more semiconductor cases than virtually any other US firm. We understand best practices for picking patents and executing on proving up infringement cases, especially in the graphics processing space in which all smart TVs now operate. 

As the second largest TV maker in the US, TCL had a large, vested interest in maintaining access to the US market. Losing the ITC case would have prevented TCL from selling in its second largest market, worth billions of dollars in revenue. We made a strategic decision to file action at the ITC, understanding it is a fast-moving legal venue that can use the power of US Customs and Border Protection to ban import to the US of infringing products. The team conducted an extensive review of AMD’s massive portfolio of over 10,000 patents, ultimately selecting five patents that would be strong enough to withstand the tests of litigation.

In January 2025, ITC issued an exclusion order to block imports of the infringing smart TVs. The outcome sent a powerful signal to non-US companies that the ITC has teeth and can be used as a strategic venue to protect intellectual property and resolve complex technology patent disputes.

Can you describe a major hurdle that happened during the course of this trial? How did you overcome it?

Trial is limited to five days, which makes presenting your case and rebutting the respondent’s case quite time restrictive. Having expert witnesses tightly on message and well prepared to answer any potential cross or direct examination is critical to succeeding at the ITC.

We overcame this challenge through extensive trial and witness preparation, including using several lawyers to present the case to the court rather than relying heavily on two or three lawyers to prepare and present the case. The witnesses also needed to be prepared to concisely communicate complicated issues in succinct and informative testimony. Mintz’s extensive past experience at the ITC, and with semiconductor cases, allowed for efficient and effective presentation of extremely complex technology.

 When did you first know you wanted to be a trial lawyer? What clicked for you?

I come from a large family with five brothers and two sisters. My mom insisted that we provide her with written submissions to resolve recurring disputes, and she would provide short oral arguments to resolve them. I knew since I invariably won those arguments that I was well positioned to handle litigation.

What are the major keys to winning over a jury or a judge?

Overpreparing and planning well in advance of a trial is key. As well as developing a fact-based narrative early in the case and adjusting to fit the ever-changing circumstances as they arise during the litigation. The theatrics and clever commentary are much less important than planning and having a well-thought-out narrative. 

What’s the best advice a mentor lawyer or judge gave you about trial prep? 

“All judges give the same advice, which is to pick your best arguments. Routinely opposing counsel, particularly defense, will pick every argument. Use the court’s time wisely, you have the best chance to present your case successfully.”