Richard Hung is co-chair of the firm’s IP Litigation Group and the cross-disciplinary Intellectual Property Group. He leads complex technology matters for clients in state and federal trial and appellate courts, including both high-stakes patent litigation and litigation against non-practicing patent holders. We recently spoke to him about his experience as a diverse attorney.
Are you an active member of any diverse legal organizations or industry groups? If so, how do you leverage that experience in your practice?
I am on the Board of the Asian Law Alliance (ALA), which helps the disadvantaged with housing, immigration, and civil rights issues. I also serve as a neutral Commissioner on the San Francisco Rent Board.
My participation in both activities acts as a constant reminder that legal services are about much, much more than corporate law. ALA’s clients invariably cannot afford legal fees and rely on pro bono legal services for representation. And people appear before the Rent Board precisely because they believe that some aspect of rent is unjust, whether real or perceived. Both also remind me that jurors — the ultimate factfinders in all of our litigation matters — often approach issues with a very different mindset.
Why do you feel MoFo’s IP Litigation Group stands out from similar practices at other firms?
Many firms have litigators but no technologists. Other firms have technologists but few real litigators. MoFo has both litigators and technologists. For three decades, our strong IP Litigation Group has teamed with our strong Patent Group to deliver outstanding results to clients in IP litigation matters.
How does having a diverse practice group benefit the clients and/or industries you serve?
Clients want diverse teams — teams that mirror them and, likely, the jury pool. Industries want diversity for a diversity of perspectives.
Read more from MoFo’s team of diverse IP litigators.