Stinson attorneys are well versed in post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, representing both petitioners challenging the validity of patents and patent owners protecting their patent rights. Our approach is individually tailored to maximize our client's business goals, whether in an inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR), or covered business method patents (CBM) proceeding. We have the relevant experience in post-grant proceedings covering subject matter ranging from chemistry and biotechnology to medical devices to computing and computer security to mechanical arts.
With a deep bench of more than 25 attorneys and patent agents admitted to practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Stinson has both the experience and broad range of technical backgrounds needed to help clients with all their post-grant needs.
- Currently working on three pending IPRs that were instituted for our food service equipment client and defending related Federal Court litigation and successful Federal Circuit appeal reversal of district court preliminary injunction.
- Currently working on a pending IPR that was instituted regarding LED replacement lamps.
- Currently representing a client in responding to a petition for IPR challenging the validity of a patent on structural building components.
- Reached favorable settlement on behalf of our client in patent infringement action related to copper plating of integrated circuit boards after achieving denial of institution on four IPR petitions.
- Successfully defended the validity of a metallurgical processing patent in an IPR.
- Successfully amended claims in a PGR to overcome an obviousness challenge for structural building components.
- Drafted and filed IPR resulting in favorable settlement and license offer for our client, a large diagnostics company.
- Served as co-counsel on IPR proceedings and lead counsel on federal court litigation on behalf of a boat manufacturer in a patent infringement matter involving their largest competitor.
- Reached favorable settlement on behalf of our client in patent infringement action related to chemically modified food starch after bringing IPR petition and obtaining PTAB ruling that there was a reasonable likelihood that all challenged claims would be shown invalid.
- Successfully defended IPR against patent for a keypad input device used with an electronic voting machine, resulting in a final written decision upholding important claims of the original patent and numerous amended claims.
- Obtained denial of institution in IPR proceeding for medical device patent owner.
- Drafted and filed IPR resulting in invalidation of several patent claims on behalf of a start-up carbon capture company.
- David D. AxtellPartner
- David R. BarnardPartner
- Jeannie M. BoettlerPartner
- Jason H. ConwayPartner
- James J. CroninPartner
- B. Scott EidsonPartner
- William R. EverdingPartner
- Janet S. Hendrickson, Ph.D.Partner
- Kurt F. JamesPartner
- Morgan L. JohnsonPartner
- Steven T. Kazmierski, Ph.D.Partner
- Vincent M. KeilPartner
- David S. KimPartner
- Timothy D. KriegerOf Counsel
- Steven N. LevittAssociate
- Jonathan G. PollmannPartner
- John R. SchroederPartner
- Colin W. TurnerPartner
News & Insights
- In the News08.04.2023
- In the News07.21.2023
- Press Release04.05.2023
- Press Release03.09.2023
- In the News02.17.2023
- Press Release02.10.2023
- Press Release01.05.2023
- Press Release08.22.2022
- Press Release05.10.2022
- Press Release03.14.2022
- Press Release02.11.2022