Richard Goldstucker focuses his practice on counseling and patent litigation covering a broad range of technologies. His practice includes broad-based strategic counseling, advising clients on strategies to avoid litigation and, when litigation is necessary, representing clients in federal and state court and in U.S. and international arbitration. Mr. Goldstucker has experience in the following technology areas:

  • Wi-Fi and Cellular networks
  • Communications network protocols, including DOCSIS, UPnP, MoCA, IEEE, and Cable Labs
  • Digital transmission techniques and error detection
  • OLED Technologies
  • Mechanical inventions, including collapsible concrete, window covering mechanisms, insulative food service modules, printers, angioplasty catheters, drainage systems

Mr. Goldstucker has also represented clients in drafting and negotiating all manner of contract, joint-development, and patent licensing agreements. He further counsels clients on developing and growing intellectual property portfolios.

Mr. Goldstucker was recognized in 2022 and the five years immediately preceding as a Georgia “Rising Star” for Intellectual Property Litigation by Super Lawyers magazine.


Representing Cox Communications in a patent litigation matter involving multiple patents directed toward the UPnP standard, MOCA technology, and the Cable Labs Home Networking Standard. Preservation Technologies, LLC v. Netflix Inc., No. 8:11-cv-01860-DOC-JPR (C.D. Ca. filed Dec. 2, 2011).

The firm served as lead counsel on behalf of Motorola Mobility, in a lawsuit involving allegations of patent infringement related to mobile phone data transfer. Motorola Mobility filed petitions for inter partes review for the asserted patents and moved to stay the proceedings. The Board instituted all of the IPRs and recently issued final decisions invalidating all of the patent claims challenged in two of the three IPRs. The Board concluded that the prior art cited by Motorola illustrated that the claimed inventions of the challenged patents were invalid. The Board has yet to issue final decisions in 2 additional related IPRs. Intellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. Motorola Mobility, LLC, Civ. No. 13-61358 (S.D. Fla. filed June 19, 2013).

The firm served as lead counsel for CoxCom, Inc. and Cox Communications, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. BT filed a patent infringement action against Cox accusing certain aspects of its telecommunications and television network of infringing eight different patents. The case settled a week before the scheduled trial. (Judge Robinson). British Telecommunications, PLC v. Coxcom Inc., No. 1:10-cv-00658 (D. Del. filed Aug. 5, 2010).

Represented Manhattan Associates in a patent infringement litigation in the District of Massachusetts. The plaintiff asserted a patent related to supply chain software against Manhattan Associates and several other defendants. Case settled. (Judge Young).

Sky Technologies LLC v. Microsoft Corp., et al., No. 1:11-cv-10833 (D. Mass. filed May 11, 2011).

Served as lead counsel on behalf of Jan Voda, M.D., a cardiologist, in a patent infringement suit related to angioplasty catheters against Medtronic, Inc. and Medtronic Vascular, Inc., in the Western District of Oklahoma. After a two-week trial in January 2012, a jury found Dr. Voda’s patents to be valid and Medtronic willfully infringed. The jury awarded Dr. Voda a royalty rate of over 14 percent. Voda v. Medtronic, Inc. et al., No. 09-cv-95 (W.D. Okla filed Jan. 22, 2009).

Successfully defended Victorinox Swiss Army, Inc. against claims of infringement of a patent related to a geographic search function in the Eastern District of Texas. Matter settled. GeoTag Inc. v. Where 2 Get It Inc. et al., No. 11-0175 (E.D. Tex. filed Mar. 15, 2011).

Lead counsel on behalf of Cox Communications and EarthLink in a suit filed by Ronald A. Katz Licensing Technology in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The suit claims patent infringement stemming from our clients’ use of automated telephone processing systems. The action was consolidated for pre-trial proceedings with other suits brought by Katz against various other defendants in the Central District of California, with Judge Klausner presiding over discovery and other pre-trial matters. Ronald A. Katz Tech. Licensing, LLP v. Cox Commc'ns, No. 07-2299 (E.D. Tex. filed April 6, 2007); In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litig., No. 07-01816 (E.D. Tex. filed July 7, 2008) and Ronald A. Katz Tech. Licensing, LLP v. EarthLink, Inc., No. 07-2235, No. 07-2299 (E.D. Tex. filed April 9, 2007); In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litig., No. 07-01816 (E.D. Tex. filed July 7, 2008).


University of Georgia School of Law J.D. (2009) recipient of the Marion Smith Memorial Academic Scholarship

University of Pennsylvania B.S. (2006) Systems Science and Engineering, cum laude


Georgia (2009)

Court Admissions

Georgia Court of Appeals

Supreme Court of Georgia

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia

Professional & Community Activities

State Bar of Georgia Young Lawyers Leadership Academy Class of 2012, Participant

Journal of Intellectual Property Law, Notes Editor (2008-2009)

American Bar Association, Member

Lawyers Club of Atlanta, Member

University of Pennsylvania Alumni Interviewer

Northside Youth Organization Pony League Baseball Coach

Volunteer Mock Trial Coach – The Westminster Schools

If you would like to receive related insights and information from Kilpatrick Townsend, please provide your contact details by filling out the form and clicking “Agree.” If you would like to access the PDF only, please click “Download Only.”