Kevin M. Bovard

Partner

Philadelphia
T +1.215.564.2727
F +1.215.568.3439

Overview

Kevin Bovard concentrates his practice on intellectual property and technology law, handling copyright, trademark and patent matters. In addition to his significant litigation experience, Kevin routinely counsels clients on trademark and copyright procurement, protection, clearance, registration and enforcement, as well as IP licensing. Kevin applies his intellectual property knowledge in many and varied industries, from small start-up firms to large multinational corporations.

Kevin recently taught Temple Law School's Introduction to Intellectual Property course as an adjunct professor.

Select Experience

Trademark/Trade Dress
  • Serves as lead trademark counsel and manages the global trademark portfolios of multiple Fortune 500 and 1000 companies, as well as smaller entities.
  • Provides comprehensive trademark services, including clearance and trademark prosecution services, as well as enforcement strategies, to consumer products companies, medical device manufacturers, software companies, apparel retailers and other brand owners.
Copyright
  • Representing, as lead counsel, an author's heir in a suit for declaratory judgment of joint authorship and for an accounting.
  • Represented a telephone directory publisher in defending claims of copyright infringement based on the plaintiff's collection of stock photographs.
Patent
  • Defending a large technology company in a patent infringement case involving contact-voltage detection along streets. District court litigation was stayed following successful institution of inter partes review at the USPTO, after which all asserted claims were found to be invalid. 
  • Defended an LED manufacturer against claims of design patent infringement. Virtually all damages were eliminated on summary judgment.
More »

Experience

Trademark/Trade Dress
  • Serves as lead trademark counsel and manages the global trademark portfolios of multiple Fortune 500 and 1000 companies, as well as smaller entities.
  • Provides comprehensive trademark services, including clearance and trademark prosecution services, as well as enforcement strategies, to consumer products companies, medical device manufacturers, software companies, apparel retailers and other brand owners.
  • Lead counsel in cancellation and opposition proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the USPTO.  
  • Lead counsel defending a light emitting diode (LED) retailer against trademark infringement and trade secret misappropriation claims.
  • Represented a playground equipment manufacturer in asserting trade dress infringement claims against a competitor.
  • Represented a clothing and home goods retailer in asserting trademark infringement and related Lanham Act claims.
  • Obtained transfer of cyber-squatted web domains through a UDRP proceeding. 
Copyright
  • Representing, as lead counsel, an author's heir in a suit for declaratory judgment of joint authorship and for an accounting.
  • Represented a telephone directory publisher in defending claims of copyright infringement based on the plaintiff's collection of stock photographs.
  • Represented a software company in asserting copyright and related breach of contract claims against a former customer.
  • Represented an enterprise applications software company in a case against its direct competitor, alleging violations of the U.S. Copyright Act, Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, California Unfair Competition Law, and related business torts.
  • Represented a visual artist in asserting claims under the Visual Artists Rights Act, the U.S. Copyright Act and state law.
Patent
  • Defending a large technology company in a patent infringement case involving contact-voltage detection along streets. District court litigation was stayed following successful institution of inter partes review at the USPTO, after which all asserted claims were found to be invalid. 
  • Defended an LED manufacturer against claims of design patent infringement. Virtually all damages were eliminated on summary judgment.

Recognitions and Memberships

Recognitions

  • The Legal Intelligencer: "Lawyers on the Fast Track" (2017)

Prior Positions

  • San Francisco Barristers' Club IP/Internet Law Section: Co-Chair, Bar Associate

Admissions

  • Pennsylvania
  • California

Education

  • J.D., Stanford Law School, 2006
  • B.A., Swarthmore College, 2003

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Federal Circuit Splits on Approach to Analyzing Graham Factors
November 6, 2017
In Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Hospira, Inc.,[1] the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court’s ruling that the asserted claims of Merck’s U.S. Patent No. 6,486,150 (the ’150 patent) were obvious despite evidence of commercial success and...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
The Federal Circuit Provides a Tutorial on Patent Venue
By Allen M. Sokal
September 27, 2017
The Federal Circuit in In re Cray, Inc., Appeal No. 2017-129 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 21, 2017), has provided extensive guidance to district courts on the meaning of an alleged infringer’s “regular and established place of business” under the...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Intellectual Ventures v. Motorola: Use = Benefit for the Purposes of System Claims Infringement
September 21, 2017
On Sept. 13, 2017, the United States District Court for the Federal Circuit clarified the meaning of the term “use” as it applies to system claims in patent infringement actions. In doing so, the court held that an infringer must benefit...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
No Bull: Acquired Distinctiveness Is Not a Given
By Kevin M. Bovard
April 20, 2017
The Trademark Trial & Appeal Board recently issued a nonprecedential decision that serves as a good reminder that distinctiveness is not automatically acquired simply by long-standing use. Klickitat Valley Chianina, LLC, Serial No...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Supreme Court Clarifies Test for Fee-Shifting in Copyright Cases
By Kevin M. Bovard
June 20, 2016
The Supreme Court on June 16 issued a unanimous ruling clarifying the test for awarding attorneys’ fees to successful copyright litigants. The decision, in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., is sure to have lasting impact on how both...
Read More ->