Send a quick message
Matthew Kading Phoenix started his career litigating antitrust matters at Quarles & Brady before building an IP litigation practice one client hired away as its own general counsel.
A NOTE TO READERS. This profile was researched and written independently by Awesome Attorneys’ editorial team. Skolnick & Harris, P.A. did not pay for, request, or review this article prior to publication, and placement on Awesome Attorneys’ editorial pages cannot be purchased. Nothing in this article is legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney–client relationship. Past results do not guarantee, warrant, or predict the outcome of any future case.
At a Glance
| Firm | Skolnick & Harris, P.A. |
| Attorney | Matthew Joseph Kading |
| Admitted | Minnesota, Wisconsin; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal and Seventh and Eighth Circuits |
| Title | Partner / Senior Trial Counsel |
| Focus | Trademark, copyright, trade secret, and other intellectual property litigation and administrative trial practice |
| Office | Phoenix, AZ 85006 |
| Contact | (602) 400-3631 |
Sources: Avvo, Justia, Lawyer Legion. Compiled August 2026.
Origin
Matthew Kading Phoenix: From Antitrust Trial Team to IP Litigation
Matthew Kading began his legal career in 1998 as a commercial and intellectual property litigator at Quarles & Brady LLP in Milwaukee and Chicago. According to a client review on Avvo, Kading was hired as part of a Quarles & Brady trial team to litigate a large-scale antitrust matter and, as one of the more junior members of that team, personally prepared and argued a pivotal motion against more experienced opposing counsel from New York. He now practices as Partner and Senior Trial Counsel at Skolnick & Harris, P.A. in Phoenix.
Practice
IP Litigation Depth Uncommon at Solo and Boutique Scale
Kading’s practice centers on trademark, copyright, trade secret, and other intellectual property litigation, along with administrative trial practice before agencies handling IP disputes. His admissions in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Seventh and Eighth Circuit Courts of Appeals, alongside the Federal Circuit, reflect a multi-state litigation background that predates his current Phoenix practice.
Track Record
Two Avvo client reviews describe specific, named engagements: one client reports hiring Kading after watching him “dismantle” opposing litigation counsel in an IP matter, where he presented a trial defense strategy that saved the client significant money; that same client later hired Kading as the company’s Head of Legal Affairs/Chief Legal Officer. Awesome Attorneys did not identify a broader, independently itemized case-results table beyond these named client accounts.
Past-Results Disclaimer: Every case is different, and no past result guarantees a similar outcome in any future matter.
Client Voice
Both of Kading’s Avvo reviews are specific and substantive rather than generic praise: one describes him being brought in to litigate an IP matter and later becoming the client’s in-house Chief Legal Officer, calling his performance beyond expectations; the other, from a Quarles & Brady colleague, describes Kading “snatching” an antitrust case “out of the jaws of defeat” as a junior attorney.
Community
Awesome Attorneys did not identify independently verifiable pro bono service, civic board membership, or policy work in the sources reviewed for this profile.
Recognition
Awesome Attorneys did not identify a Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers, or Chambers USA ranking for Kading in the sources reviewed. His strongest independently verifiable credentials are the two specific, named client and colleague accounts described above, including one client’s decision to hire him directly as in-house general counsel — a meaningfully different form of endorsement than a marketing review.
The Arizona Legal Backdrop
What follows is general legal information, not legal advice.
Patents, federal trademarks, and copyrights are governed almost entirely by federal law rather than Arizona statute, filed with and enforced through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and federal courts. Arizona separately protects trade secrets through the Arizona Uniform Trade Secrets Act, A.R.S. § 44-401 et seq., a civil remedy independent of any federal patent or registration — directly relevant to Kading’s named trade secret litigation practice.
The Awesome Attorneys Assessment
Matthew Kading Phoenix’s clearest differentiator is a documented, specific track record of client trust extending beyond a single engagement — a client who hired him for one IP litigation matter later brought him in-house as Chief Legal Officer, a rare and meaningful form of endorsement.
The honest trade-off: Awesome Attorneys did not identify independent peer-review recognition (Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers, Chambers) or a broader public review record beyond the two specific, substantive accounts described above, so prospective clients working from formal rankings alone should weigh that against the strength of the individual account documented here.
Methodology & Sourcing
This profile was researched in August 2026 from Avvo, Justia, and Lawyer Legion. Awesome Attorneys did not identify a competing “Matthew Kading” practicing IP law elsewhere that could create identity confusion. Skolnick & Harris, P.A. did not commission, review, or pay for this profile.
Publisher Disclosure & Independence Notice
This profile is an independent editorial article published by Awesome Attorneys. Awesome Attorneys does not endorse, recommend, or warrant any lawyer or law firm profiled on this site, and inclusion in this series is not paid placement.