Trending Now
Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Phil Goter, Partner, Intellectual Property Group, Barnes & Thornburg

By John Freund |

Community Spotlight: Phil Goter, Partner, Intellectual Property Group, Barnes & Thornburg

Clients trust Phillip Goter to enforce and manage their valuable intellectual property. Phil counsels organizations – ranging from startups to Fortune 100 companies – around the world, managing litigation through trial and appeal, thoughtfully obtaining patents and trademarks, conducting pre-suit investigations, advising on regulatory issues, conducting due diligence and freedom to operate analyses, and resolving complex disputes.

Phil leverages his business and industry experience when working with his clients, and they value his strategic thinking and trust his counsel regarding IP strategies that protect R&D investment and product markets.

Phil, who practices in the firm’s Minneapolis office, frequently works with high-tech clients in the computer software and hardware space. His keen familiarity with computer hardware, standards-essential cellular infrastructure, 5G, GPS, mobile apps, autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence, machine learning, computer and network security, VoIP, wireless networking, home automation, medical devices, and cloud computing aid him in providing successful outcomes for his clients.

He has deep experience providing counsel to international businesses on U.S. intellectual property matters, including representing European and Asian consumer electronics, networking and telecommunications, and pharmaceutical companies in global IP disputes. His practice includes patent litigation in U.S. district courts around the country and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, with the majority in key patent litigation venues such as Texas, Delaware, and California.

Phil also has significant experience with complex economic matters and his cases have included competition law issues, such as monopolization, attempted monopolization, and Walker Process and sham litigation claims. He has successfully obtained lost profits verdicts in pharmaceutical cases and has commissioned and used numerous expert surveys in litigation to prove infringement, indirect infringement, rates of infringement, apportionment, lost profits, and value of the invention.

He also has in-house counsel experience. Prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg, Phil was an investment manager and legal counsel for a global, publicly traded litigation finance and legal risk management company. He advanced the company’s IP initiatives globally and handled U.S. litigation matters through the entire life cycle of the litigation funding relationship, including sourcing, evaluating, and monitoring IP and commercial investments through to resolution.

Outside of his legal practice, Phil teaches intellectual property at the University of Minnesota Law School and can often be found at the hockey rink, coaching his three children’s youth hockey teams.

Company Name and Description: With more than 800 attorneys and other legal professionals, Barnes & Thornburg is one of the largest law firms in the country. We serve clients worldwide from offices in Atlanta, Boston, California, Chicago, Delaware, Indiana, Michigan, Minneapolis, Nashville, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Philadelphia, Raleigh, Salt Lake City, South Florida, Texas and Washington, D.C. We provide guidance in more than 50 dedicated practice areas, including litigation, intellectual property, labor and employment and corporate law. We are where you need us. Find out more at btlaw.com.

Company Website: btlaw.com

Year Founded: 1982

Headquarters: Largest office is in Indianapolis

Area of Focus: Intellectual property

Member Quote: Litigation finance has become an increasingly important financial tool for IP owners, who often find themselves disadvantaged by large, well-capitalized competitors. In this lopsided dynamic, non-recourse capital from trusted legal funders gives me the ability to right the harms inflicted upon my clients.

About the author

John Freund

John Freund

Commercial

View All

Triple-I Launches Consumer Campaign Against Litigation Funding in Texas and Kentucky

The Insurance Information Institute has opened a new front in the fight over third-party litigation funding, launching a consumer-awareness campaign in Texas and Kentucky ahead of both states' 2027 legislative sessions. The push adds two more targets to a state-level reform wave in which more than 20 states have already enacted funding disclosure laws.

As reported by Insurance Business, Triple-I is framing the campaign around the transmission of litigation costs into insurance premiums. Michel Léonard, the organisation's chief economist, put the argument bluntly: "Litigation is outgrowing the economy. That gap doesn't stay in the courtroom. It lands in claims, reserves and premiums." Critics of such measures counter that disclosure mandates and funding restrictions limit access to justice for claimants who cannot otherwise afford to litigate.

Casualty pricing is the evidence Triple-I points to. While commercial property rates declined over the past year, casualty lines have stayed elevated, with umbrella and excess liability recording the sharpest increases and commercial auto under sustained pressure.

The underlying cost data comes from several Triple-I studies, including work with the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform and the Casualty Actuarial Society. U.S. tort costs reached $579.7bn in 2023, nearly double the $299.7bn recorded in 2014. Other liability accounted for $249.3bn and personal auto liability for $188.1bn. Triple-I estimates that legal system abuse added between $231.6bn and $281.2bn to liability losses across the decade to 2023.

Proposed DIFC Arbitration Law Reforms Would Impose Express Third-Party Funding Disclosure

Dubai's financial free zone is moving toward a statutory disclosure obligation for litigation funders. The proposed 2026 reforms to the DIFC Arbitration Law—the most substantial overhaul since the statute was enacted in 2008—would introduce express disclosure requirements for third-party funding arrangements in arbitrations seated in the Dubai International Financial Centre.

As reported by SCC Online, the reforms were examined during Dubai Arbitration Week 2026, in a session on the proposed changes to the DIFC Arbitration Law and the new DIFC Mediation Law. Justice Michael Black of the DIFC Courts framed the funding provision as a measure to strengthen transparency and accountability in arbitral proceedings. The panel, moderated by Graham Lovett of the DIAC Arbitration Court, also included DIFC Courts Chief Justice Wayne Martin, DIAC Registrar Robert Stephen, and counsel from Akin.

The funding disclosure requirement sits within a broader package. Other proposed changes would cut the window for set-aside challenges from three months to 30 days on a non-extendable basis, permit summary determination of unmeritorious claims, allow peremptory orders backed by sanctions, give statutory recognition to emergency arbitrator decisions, and extend confidentiality to the existence of proceedings. A standalone Mediation Law would make mediated settlements binding and court-enforceable.

The reforms follow a DIFC consultation that ran from 11 June to 10 July 2026. Arbitration volume at the DIFC Courts underscores the stakes: the courts handled 54 arbitration matters in 2025 and 45 by early November 2026, roughly one-third of the Court of First Instance workload.

Federal Court Removes Hellyer Metals Liquidator, Citing Failure to Pursue Litigation Funding

The Federal Court of Australia has removed the liquidator of Hellyer Metals Pty Ltd, finding a lack of independence and criticising his handling of litigation funding offers that could have financed an investigation into a disputed asset transfer.

As reported by ABC News, Justice Shaun McElwaine delivered orders and reasons on 10 November 2026 in Goshawk Mining Pty Ltd v Hellyer Metals Pty Ltd, in the matter of Hellyer Metals Pty Ltd (in liq) [2026] FCA 1676, removing Liam Bailey of O'Brien Palmer and appointing Adam Johnston in his place, with all books and records to be handed over. The judgment records that the parties behind the share transfer under scrutiny had appointed Bailey, who then retained as his solicitor the lawyer who had introduced them. He also provided a draft statutory liquidation report to directors the court described as intimately involved in the transaction, conduct the judge called "a serious error of judgement and demonstrative of a lack of independence."

The funding findings were central. Time records showed 30.35 hours of investigative work between January and May 2026, of which just 12 minutes were spent on litigation funding. From March 2026, two companies offered to discuss funding an investigation, but the court found he failed to engage meaningfully. A funding agreement was signed only after the removal proceeding had commenced, following an approach from lawyers acting for two bankrupt former directors.

Hellyer Metals entered voluntary administration in January 2026, with Bailey appointed liquidator on 22 January. Assets had been transferred to associated company Celestial Group around the time the Tasmanian government ordered the Hellyer Gold Mine temporarily shut over unpaid debts. Goshawk Mining and Saxby Capital, which obtained a Supreme Court order freezing $36.4 million, are pursuing damages exceeding $36 million. The court described the transaction as prima facie highly questionable and said removal was indeed required.