Most Innovative Public Company Legal Department of the Year Finalist: Pure Storage
"Every member of the legal team from top to bottom is encouraged to drive the business forward and is empowered to make decisions and take risks to do so, while protecting Pure's culture and reputation," says general counsel Joe FitzGerald.
October 28, 2019 at 01:00 PM
3 minute read
The Pure Storage in-house department adopted a process with engineers and outside counsel to optimize patent filings that saved almost 400 hours of engineering worth at least $80,000 in company time last year. That innovation landed Pure Storage a finalist spot for Most Innovative Public Company Legal Department of the Year as part of The Recorder's California Leaders in Tech Law and Innovation Awards. Joe FitzGerald, the general counsel and corporate secretary of Pure Storage, recently discussed navigating two major acquisitions in the past year.
The Recorder: What are the distinguishing characteristics of Pure Storage's in-house legal department and the lawyers and staff that make it up?
Joe FitzGerald: Pure Storage's core values are creativity, customer first, persistence, ownership, and teamwork. Pure legal embodies and embraces those values in everything we do. Pure legal starts with a "get it done" attitude. Every member of the legal team from top to bottom is encouraged to drive the business forward and is empowered to make decisions and take risks to do so, while protecting Pure's culture and reputation.
Our legal team includes a diverse spectrum of people from a wide variety of backgrounds (law firm, corporate, government and nonprofit), all who share a business-first attitude and passion for driving growth in a fun, fast-paced and collegial atmosphere.
What was the biggest challenge your in-house team faced in the past year and how did you overcome it?
Growing a company inorganically is often both a challenge and an opportunity. In the past year, Pure seized this opportunity and acquired two companies, one in California and one in Sweden—Pure's first significant acquisitions in its history. This process required coordination between numerous internal teams and building many processes for the first time. Pure Legal spent significant time setting up and managing new tools and processes to ensure the completion of due diligence and preparation for signing and closing in a timely manner, as well as taking steps to ensure a smooth integration process.
The Pure legal team pooled expertise in all areas of the deals (M&A, corporate, IP and technology, employment, commercial) and formed deal teams to efficiently address all of these aspects, and assigned specific work to outside counsel, particularly where local-jurisdiction expertise was required. This required top-notch communication and coordination to meet demanding timelines.
Besides that challenge, what was your legal department's most significant accomplishment of the past year and why?
In June 2019 the Pure legal team completed a large patent acquisition, more than doubling the total portfolio to over 2000 assets, all while maintaining a constant head count. This, in part, was due to IP management tools deployed in 2018 (at a cost approximately half that of the previous tool) enabling far more efficient portfolio management. This acquisition has visibly strengthened the company's IP position in relation to competitors.
The pre-acquisition diligence and negotiation, and post-acquisition integration and strategic application of the acquired portfolio has been a huge effort on the part of the Pure legal IP team. To efficiently manage this task Pure legal marshaled resources from engineering, legal, the chief technology officer's team, and external specialists to quickly parse through the assets and report out on relevance to competitors and to the broader market. These assets are now being refined and targeted for strategic defensive use.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllZoom Faces Intellectual Property Suit Over AI-Based Augmented Video Conferencing
3 minute read'A Warning Shot to Board Rooms': DOJ Decision to Fight $14B Tech Merger May Be Bad Omen for Industry
California Walnut Grower and German Investment Firm Vie for Lead Plaintiff Status in Super Micro Securities Action
Trending Stories
- 1Conversation Catalyst: Transforming Professional Advancement Through Strategic Dialogue
- 2Trump Taps McKinsey CLO Pierre Gentin for Commerce Department GC
- 3Critical Mass With Law.com's Amanda Bronstad: 700+ Residents Near Ohio Derailment File New Suit, Is the FAA to Blame For Last Month's Air Disasters?
- 4Law Journal Column on Marital Residence Sales in Pending Divorces Puts 'Misplaced' Reliance on Two Cases
- 5A Message to the Community: Meeting the Moment in 2025
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250