Senior Graphic Designer
Sully has experience creating persuasive media for hearings and trial proceedings in both state and federal courts. He is a lead illustrator and one of the best technology tutorial producers around. His advanced story-telling skills and instincts for visual aesthetics bring narratives to life in ways that are completely mesmerizing and convincing to jurors. Sully not only is a fantastic graphic designer, but has extensive experience presenting in the courtroom at Markman hearings.
A veteran of the interactive advertising industry, Sully has over ten years of experience creating persuasive media. He produced illustrations and designs for some of the most recognizable consumer brands in the country, and this work has been honored with creative marketing awards, including a W3 award and two Davey Gold awards.
Since offering his media skills to the legal industry in 2012, Sully has produced digital presentations in a variety of patent infringement and trade secret cases. These cases involved varied subject matter, including cellular technology, HVAC systems, internet security, home furnishings, and more. Sully specializes in working with attorneys to produce informative technology tutorials and convincing Markman presentations.
When not in the courtroom, Sully spends his time participating in the local Dallas art scene. He contributes a piece annually to Art Conspiracy, a charity art auction that supports local creative organizations. He is also the designer for the East Dallas Peep at the Coops Tour, a chicken coop tour that raises funds for local elementary school science and agriculture programs. Sully lives in a mid-century home in Oak Cliff with his dachshund, two cats, and three chickens.
“Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
Adaptix v. Sprint
Intellectual Ventures v. AT&T Mobility
Papst Licensing v. Apple
Personalized Media v.
VIZIO & Samsung
Nokia Solutions v. Huawei
Ascion v. Tempur Sealy et al.
Broadcom, et al. v. Amazon.com