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
© 2024 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 AllIn Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
6 minute readPre-Internet High Court Ruling Hobbling Efforts to Keep Tech Giants from Using Below-Cost Pricing to Bury Rivals
6 minute readWill Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
Trending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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