Electrical, Mechanical, and Computer Science Prosecution

Businesses today operate in a global marketplace of ideas in which protecting intellectual property isn’t simply a necessary defensive exercise, but a vital component of strategy that can define the efforts of an entire organization. Our Electrical, Mechanical, and Computer Software Prosecution team is comprised of more than 40 registered patent attorneys and agents, many of whom are recognized leaders in areas that include semiconductors, software, navigation systems, medical devices, aeronautics, and wireless communications and location technologies. Many of our team members hold advanced degrees in electrical, mechanical, and computer engineering fields and have worked in industry as engineers so they have a technical, as well as a legal understanding, of these industries.

Beyond our stellar track record in securing patent protection, our customized, big-picture management of intellectual property portfolios for a client roster that ranges from multinational companies, including 10 of the Fortune 25, to emerging businesses across numerous industries sets us apart from other law firms. By aligning the development of intellectual property (IP) rights with our clients’ overall business plan, we help clients fully understand the value of their patent portfolios and realize their full potential. We counsel clients on strategic use of intellectual property, including developing strategies for maximizing a client's intellectual property in a given market, as well as patent preparation and prosecution.

We meet with research and development personnel during the development of new products and technologies to help identify subject matter that can be patented, cultivate a strategy for protecting the client’s intellectual property, and determine applications that are positioned to have the greatest value by employing a combination of patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret strategies. As a result, when challenges arise, we meet them from a vantage point of deep knowledge and understanding.

More »

We routinely partner with a wide network of international IP firms to help clients secure patents in Europe, the United Kingdom, Japan, China, Korea, Latin America, and other countries around the world. As our clients increasingly do business worldwide, foreign patents have become crucial to protecting their assets and increasing their market share and profit margins. In addition, we use sophisticated tools to conduct an ongoing cost-benefit analysis to assist our clients in deciding which foreign patents to maintain.

Our group includes some of the leading post-grant practitioners in the country, having successfully prosecuted hundreds of ex parte and inter partes reexaminations and interferences prior to enactment of the America Invents Act, and now one of the leading filers of inter partes reviews and covered business method patent reviews under the America Invents Act.

Electrical

Our electrical patent attorneys have prosecuted patents in technologies ranging from automotive diagnostic test equipment to z-wave home automation devices and everything in between. We represent firms that develop and market electronic products and services, including cable communications, internet backbone equipment, computer hardware, semiconductor mask repair technologies, peripheral devices, magnetic media, instrumentation, electrical production equipment, electrical medical devices, electrical consumer products, telecommunication devices, electrical connectors, and a broad range of industrial products.

Mechanical

We have a deep bench of mechanical patent attorneys who regularly assist our clients in obtaining both utility and design patent protection for their mechanical inventions. Our experience spans the very largest devices, such as construction equipment, to the very smallest, with a particular focus in nanotechnologies. Our experience cuts across all industries, with attorneys working in fields as disparate as medical devices and oil well drilling.

Computer Software

Building a useful patent portfolio, particularly in the rapidly-changing computer field, begins with identifying a client's business goals and tailoring a patent strategy to fit those goals. Whether in underground utility locating equipment or large scale remote access servers, software is the core of many of our clients’ businesses and our attorneys are well-versed in protecting software innovations. In addition to Internet and software-related inventions, our attorneys assist clients in obtaining business method patents in the insurance and banking fields.

Our firm's attorneys also assist clients in licensing transactions to monetize their own intellectual property assets, as well as to obtain rights from third parties. We evaluate computer-related products and intellectual property portfolios to help clients enter licensing negotiations with a true understanding of their position. Some of the areas we have worked in include: digital rights management, operating systems, compilers, and Internet-based services.

Professionals

Name Title Office Email
Hussein Akhavannik Associate Washington, D.C.
David R. Bailey Partner Philadelphia
Mark E. Braun Associate Philadelphia
Barry E. Bretschneider Partner Washington, D.C.
Craig M. Brown Associate Philadelphia
John W. Caldwell Partner Philadelphia
Derek H. Campbell Associate Chicago
Eduardo M. Carreras Of Counsel Atlanta
Timothy D. Casey Partner Seattle
Thomas J. Clare Associate Philadelphia
Craig L. Cupid Associate Atlanta
Erdal R. Dervis Partner Washington, D.C.
John P. Donohue Jr. Partner Philadelphia
Jeremy M. Dukmen Associate Philadelphia
Sarah C. Dukmen Associate Philadelphia
Michael P. Dunnam Partner Philadelphia
Kenneth R. Eiferman Partner Philadelphia
David A. Einhorn Partner New York
Stephen S. Fabry Partner Washington, D.C.
Adam J. Forman Partner Philadelphia
Harold H. Fullmer Partner Philadelphia
Han Gim Associate Seattle
Gregory A. Grissett Associate Philadelphia
James B. Hatten Associate Atlanta
J. Randy Hibshman II Associate Washington, D.C.
John S. Hilten Partner Washington, D.C.
Herbert E. Hoffman Associate Philadelphia
Barry E. Kaplan Partner Atlanta
Nilesh Khatri Associate Washington, D.C.
P. Alan Larson Counsel Washington, D.C.
Eugene Lieberstein Of Counsel New York
David A. Mancino Partner Cincinnati
Connor L. McCune Associate Seattle
John E. McGlynn Partner Philadelphia
Phong D. Nguyen Partner Washington, D.C.
Joseph P. O'Malley Counsel Philadelphia
Joseph F. Oriti Partner Philadelphia
John M. Paolino Counsel Philadelphia
Tayan B. Patel Associate Washington, D.C.
William C. Powell Associate Seattle
Aaron B. Rabinowitz Partner Philadelphia
Michael J. Riesen Associate Atlanta
Jeffrey H. Rosedale Ph.D. Partner Philadelphia
Douglas S. Rupert Partner Chicago
Steven B. Samuels Partner Philadelphia
Brian L. Saunders Associate Philadelphia
David C. Schleifer Associate Seattle
Shubhrangshu Sengupta Patent Agent Washington, D.C.
Kenneth J. Sheehan Partner Washington, D.C.
Scott R. Stanley Associate Cincinnati
Michael D. Stein Partner Seattle
Michael J. Swope Partner Seattle
Miranda Aiqing Wang Technical Advisor Seattle
Shawnna M. Yashar Associate Washington, D.C.

News

Press Releases

Alerts

Articles

Key Contacts

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Trademark Trends: Back-to-Back Arguments in Trademark Cases at SCOTUS
December 19, 2014
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in trademark cases on consecutive days this month. On December 2, 2014, the issue of whether a finding by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of likelihood of confusion precludes the issue from...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
USPTO Issues “2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility”
December 18, 2014
On December 15, 2014, the USPTO published a document titled “2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility” (Interim Guidance). The new Interim Guidance follows the previous preliminary examination instructions issued on June...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Don’t Miss the Window for Post-Grant Review: Monitor Your Competitors by Creating Alert Systems
November 14, 2014
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has new and popular procedures for challenging the validity of (in other words, killing) a competitor’s patent. The most powerful procedure, a Post-Grant Review (PGR), must be filed within nine months...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
All Native Advertising is Not Equal: Why that Matters Under the First Amendment and Why it Should Matter to the FTC – Part V
October 23, 2014
In this five part series, originally published in the Summer 2014 edition of the Media Law Resource Center Bulletin,[1] we take an in-depth look at the native advertising phenomenon and the legal issues surrounding the practice.  After...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Another Step in the Long March from Campbell v. Acuff-Rose toward Fair Use Free-for-All?
October 21, 2014
Fox News Network, LLC v. TVEyes, Inc., 2014 WL 4444043 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2014) TVEyes is a media-monitoring subscription service that “records the entire content of television and radio broadcasts and creates a searchable database of that...
Read More ->