Careers

Diversity

With 18 offices, from New York to Los Angeles and Seattle to Orlando, we live and work in communities all over the U.S., collaborating across locations, disciplines and even borders. Our experienced, highly ranked lawyers serve businesses wherever they are and wherever they want to go.

Offices

About Us

Pages

Professionals

Thought leadership: blogs, podcasts, videos, publications, events and news

Insights

Services

Pro Bono

Am Law 100 firm with practices in Business, Digital Assets and Data Management, Intellectual Property, Labor & Employment, Litigation and Tax.

Home | BakerHostetler

Daniel Goettle Shares His Journey to Office Managing Partner in Law.com Article

ADventures in Law

FTC’s Junk Fee Rule FAQs Give Road Map for Displaying Price

Peter Roskam, Jeff Paravano Provide Federal Insights at TEI Regions 4 and 5 Conference

The Delayed, but Not Forgotten, Disclosure of PFAS: TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Postponed While States Fill the Gaps

Kevin has testified before and advised members of the U.S. House of Representatives on proposed patent reform legislative initiatives. He is honored to have been selected a BTI Client Service All-Star in 2015 and 2020, including being one of only 25 intellectual property attorneys in the U.S. to achieve that ranking in 2015. He is ranked in Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business in the area of Intellectual Property, where he is described as "sensitive to business issues (with) a real ability to see the important issues in any matter" (Chambers USA 2021), "(having) invaluable expertise in IP law and an ability to understand and appreciate cutting-edge technology" (Chambers USA 2021), and "a very good litigator who listens well to the company's position and objectives and gets what we want." (Chambers USA 2014) He is also the primary author of the Patent Local Rules for the Southern District of Ohio, implemented in June 2010.

core/freeform

J.D., Loyola Law School, 1993

B.A., University of California, Berkeley, 1989

University of California, Irvine, 

<ul>
<li>Chambers USA: Intellectual Property in Ohio (2010 to 2024)
<ul>
<li>Band 2 (2023 to 2024), Band 4 (2018 to 2020), Band 3 (2012 to 2017, 2021 to 2022), Up and Coming (2010 to 2011)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>The Legal 500 United States (2015 to 2018, 2020 to 2024)
<ul>
<li>Recommended in Intellectual Property: Trade Secrets (litigation and non-contentious matters) (2024)</li>
<li>Recommended in Intellectual Property: Patent Litigation (full coverage) (2020 to 2023)</li>
<li>Recommended in Patent Litigation (full coverage) (2015 to 2018)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>IAM Patent 1000: The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners
<ul>
<li>Ohio: Recommended for Patent Litigation (2023 to 2025)</li>
<li>California: Recommended for Patent Litigation (2025)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>BTI Client Service All-Star (2015, 2020)</li>
<li>The Best Lawyers in America® (2013 to 2025)
<ul>
<li>Ohio: Litigation &#8211; Intellectual Property
<ul>
<li>Best Lawyers® &#8220;Lawyer of the Year&#8221; (2022)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Ohio: Litigation &#8211; Patent</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Managing Intellectual Property
<ul>
<li>IP Stars, Ohio (2014 to 2015, 2025)</li>
<li>IP Stars, United States (2014 to 2015)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Martindale-Hubbell: AV Preeminent</li>
<li>Ohio &#8220;Super Lawyer&#8221; (2012 to 2025)</li>
<li>World IP Review Leader (2018 to 2021, 2024)</li>
</ul>

Columbus

Managing IP Announces 2025 IP Stars

Chambers USA Guide 2025 Recognizes 169 BakerHostetler Attorneys and 72 Practice Areas

BakerHostetler Ohio Attorneys Selected as Super Lawyers, Rising Stars

BakerHostetler attorneys, practice areas stand out in The Legal 500 annual guide

Chambers USA Guide 2024 Recognizes 155 BakerHostetler Attorneys and ­66 Practice Areas

2024 BHIPP - BakerHostetler IP Perspective

Trade Secret Litigation: The Power of Protection

BakerHostetler Attorneys and Practice Areas Recognized in The Legal 500 2023 Guide

Chambers USA Guide 2023 Honors 147 BakerHostetler Attorneys and Recognizes 64 Practice Areas

Hundreds of BakerHostetler Attorneys Honored as 2023 Best Lawyers, Ones to Watch and Lawyers of the Year

BakerHostetler Attorneys, Practice Areas Shine in The Legal 500 2022 Guide

Chambers USA Guide 2022 Honors 145 BakerHostetler Attorneys and Recognizes 62 Practice Areas

Remarkable Achievements: IP Teams Earn Three Practice and 16 Individual Rankings

191 BakerHostetler Attorneys Named in 2022 “Best Lawyers” List; 10 Recognized as “Lawyer of the Year”

BakerHostetler Attorneys, Practice Areas Recognized in The Legal 500 Guide for 2021

Chambers and Partners USA Honors 127 Attorneys and 43 Practice Areas in 2019 Guide

BakerHostetler Boosts High Marks in the Legal 500 2018 Annual Guide

Chambers and Partners USA Honors 118 Attorneys and 45 Practice Areas in 2018 Guide

150 BakerHostetler Attorneys Named 2016 Super Lawyers; 91 Named Rising Stars

Intellectual Property

Patent Litigation

Noncompete and Trade Secrets

Intellectual Property Indemnification

Industries

Energy

Enterprise Issues

Safeguard IP Trade Secrets

IP and AI Indemnity

Representative Experience
<ul>
<li>In 2024, obtained dismissal with prejudice for no consideration in StarOne Intellectual Property Group Ltd. v. Cardinal Health, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-296, United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Represented defendant in the case alleging infringement of a medical device patent involving dispensing closure technology.</li>
<li>In 2024, settled on confidential terms M.E.A.C. Engineering, Ltd v. Cardinal Health Inc., Case No. 23-cv-16471, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Represented defendant in the case alleging infringement of two medical device patents involving wound closure and drainage systems (negative pressure wound therapy).</li>
<li>In 2024, obtained dismissal without prejudice for no consideration in Push Data LLC v. First Watch Restaurants, Inc., Case No. 4:24-cv-129, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Represented defendant in the case alleging infringement of three patents involving wireless internet services, push notifications and geolocation-based services, among others.</li>
<li>In 2024, obtained dismissal without prejudice for no consideration in Push Data LLC v. Five Below, Inc., Case No. 4:24-cv-401, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Represented defendant in the case alleging infringement of three patents involving wireless internet services, push notifications and geolocation-based services, among others.</li>
<li>In 2024, obtained dismissal without prejudice for no consideration in Commworks Solutions, LLC v. Axon Networks, Inc., Case No. 8:24-cv-02250, United States District Court for the Central District of California. Represented defendant in the case alleging infringement of six patents involving routers.</li>
<li>On 2024, obtained dismissal without prejudice for no consideration in Gravel Rating Systems LLC v. Pacific Sunwear of California, LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-881, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Represented defendant in the case alleging patent infringement relating to network-based knowledge sharing system and interfaces.</li>
<li>In 2023, settled KPR U.S., L.L.C. and Cardinal Health 200, LLC v. LifeSync Corporation, Advantage Medical Electronics, LLC and 3M Company, Case No. 0:22-cv-60468, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Represented plaintiffs in the case alleging infringement of three patents related to connectors used in cardiac monitoring equipment. The case settled on confidential terms after successfully defending against institution of inter partes review petitions.</li>
<li>In 2022, settled Town &amp; Country Linen Corp. et al. v. Ingenious Designs LLC, HSN, Inc. and Joy Mangano, No. 18-cv-5075 LGS (S.D.N.Y.) on confidential terms. Town &amp; Country alleged misappropriation of forty trade secrets and ideas, breach of five separate contracts, tortious interference, three equitable counts, patent infringement and copyright infringement by Ingenious Designs LLC, HSN, Inc. and Joy Mangano. Successfully dismissed the copyright claim through a motion to dismiss. Successfully defeated thirty-eight out of forty of the alleged trade secrets and ideas, four out of five of the contract claims, the tortious interference claim and all three equitable counts through a 2021 summary judgment ruling. Eliminated Plaintiff’s damages expert on numerous issues through the Court’s 2022 Daubert ruling. The case settled right after the Daubert ruling.</li>
<li>In 2021, obtained a temporary restraining order in Zekelman Industries, Inc., Z Modular LLC, and Z-Modular Canada Inc. FKA Vectorbloc Corp., v. Julian Bowron and Vectorminima Inc., Case No. 2020 CH 6539 (Illinois State Court). This was a trade secret, copyright and breach of contract action. Defendant sold his company to Zekelman, left the company shortly after and started a competing company. The case settled on confidential terms.</li>
<li>In 2021, obtained a dismissal with prejudice for no consideration in Forum US Inc. v. Borets U.S., Inc., Civil Action No. 4:21-cv-02015, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The case alleged infringement of four patents related to a tool for sand management for wells using downhole pumps. Plaintiff dismissed the case after we identified prior art that knocked out all four patents.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>In 2021, won final judgment (via motions for summary judgment) in a Southern District of Texas case on behalf of Weatherford Technologies, Marathon Oil Company and In-Depth Systems. The case involved trade secret, licensing and ownership of dozens of patents and know-how in RFID drilling technologies.</li>
<li>In 2021, prevailed on behalf of Henny Penny in a Southern District of Ohio patent infringement case involving deep fryer technology. Successfully stayed the action while petitioning to cancel all of the asserted claims in the PTAB via an IPR petition. The PTAB, after extensive efforts by the patentee to amend the claims, canceled all of the original claims and denied the motion to amend, resulting in the elimination of the asserted patent.</li>
<li>Won arbitration trial in 2019 on behalf of Weatherford entity, In-Depth Systems, in Houston, Texas. The case involved substantial contract and intellectual property ownership claims related to RFID drilling technologies.</li>
<li>Successfully defended accused infringer Guidance Software against patent claims related to computer forensics technologies, resulting in a finding of no violation after trial (In re Certain Computer Forensic Devices &amp; Products Containing the Same, International Trade Commission, Case No. 337-TA-799).</li>
<li>Successfully defended accused infringer against patent claims related to DVD scene selection menus. Case was settled on confidential terms after jury trial in December 2012 (Patent Harbor, LLC v. Audiovox Corp., E.D. Texas, Case No. 6:10-cv-00361).</li>
<li>Represented patent owner against alleged infringer related to food packaging technology in declaratory judgment action. Jury trial occurred in January 2013, and case was successfully settled after jury impaneled on confidential terms (Huhtamaki, Inc. v. PWP Industries, Inc., S.D. Ohio, Case No. 1:09-cv-795).</li>
<li>In patent infringement case, obtained judgment on the pleadings of invalidity based on 35 U.S.C. § 101 for accused infringer Hugo Boss (Clear with Computer LLC v. Hugo Boss Fashions, Inc., E.D. Texas, Case No. 6:12-cv-00867).</li>
<li>Obtained dismissal of claim based on early stage 101 motion for judgment on the pleadings. Represented accused infringer Codemasters Inc. in patent infringement action involving facial morphing technologies for computer games (McRo Inc. v. Codemasters Inc., C.D. California, Case No. 2:14-cv-00439-GW-FFM).</li>
<li>Obtained summary judgment of invalidity of patent claims based on obviousness for accused infringer IPS Corp. (Oatey v. IPS Corp., N.D. Ohio, Case No. 1:03-cv-01231).</li>
<li>Obtained summary judgment of invalidity of patent claims for accused infringer Tamarack Scientific (Ultratech, Inc. v. Tamarack Scientific Co., N.D. California, Case No. 3:03-cv-03235).</li>
<li>Won court ruling eliminating plaintiff’s $20M claim. Represented Bally Technologies and Scientific Games related to contractual dispute over TITO Agreements. (Case settled on confidential terms after court ruled in client’s favor on primary liability issues.) (Bally Technologies, Inc. and Scientific Games Corporation v. International Game Technology, Inc., District Court Clark County, Nevada, Case No. A-14-711384).</li>
<li>Represented Frontgate Marketing, Inc., Cinmar LLC and Grandin Road, et al. against Balsam Brands, Inc., et al. with respect to allegations of patent infringement, inter alia, relating to invertible Christmas trees. Case settled after defeated plaintiff’s TRO motion and won claim construction. (Balsam Brands, Inc., et al. v. Frontgate Marketing, Inc., Cinmar LLC and Grandin Road, et al., N.D. California, Case No. 3:15-cv-04829).</li>
<li>Represented Funai Electric Co., Ltd., et al. against LSI Corporation, Agere Systems LLC and Avago Technologies General IP with respect to allegations of antitrust, RAND violations and patent infringement, inter alia, relating to WIFI and MPEG technologies (multiple cases settled together on confidential terms). (Funai Electric Co., Ltd., et al v. LSI Corporation, et al., N.D. California, Case No. 5:16-cv-01210).</li>
<li>Represented dunnhumby Ltd. against emnos (an American Express subsidiary) in patent infringement action. Case settled after prevailed against a motion to dismiss, prevailed against multiple CBM petitions and after prevailed on claim construction. (dunnhumby Ltd. v. emnos USA Corp., N.D. Illinois, Case No. 1:13-cv-00399).</li>
<li>CBM Petition: Represented respondent in CBM proceedings with the USPTO. (emnos USA Corp., Petitioner v. dunnhumby Limited, patent owner. CBM 2015-00116). Petition denied.</li>
<li>CBM Petition: Represented respondent in CBM proceedings with the USPTO. (emnos USA Corp., Petitioner v. dunnhumby LTD., patent owner. CBM 2015-00162). Petition denied.</li>
<li>In patent infringement case, successfully asserted Newport’s patents against alleged infringer related to diode-pumped, intracavity doubled lasers (Newport Corp. v. Lighthouse Photonics Inc., C.D. California, Case No. SACV12-719).</li>
</ul>
Representative Speaking Engagements and Presentations
<ul>
<li>“The Importance of Patent Reform to Small Business,” testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Small Business (March 29, 2007)</li>
<li>“Evolution and Strategies for Litigating Patent Disputes,” (2021)</li>
<li>“Patent Law: 2020 Review,” presented for Fronteo in Japan (2020)</li>
<li>“Standard-Essential Patents – Licensing and Litigating Rand-Encumbered Patents,” presented for Fronteo in Japan (2016 and 2018).</li>
<li>“TC Heartland Aftermath” – presented in Japan (2017)</li>
<li>“Going to Trial: Preparation, Management, and Strategy,” presented at The IP Strategy Summit in Palo Alto, California (June 19, 2014)</li>
<li>“Indirect Infringement Post-Suprema, Inc. v. ITC,” presented to American Intellectual Property Law Association, webinar (March 20, 2014)</li>
<li>“Current U.S. Legislative, Administrative and Judicial Proposals: Dealing with Trolls and Other Issues,” presented at Cincinnati IP Meeting (February 2014)</li>
<li>“IPRs After One Year: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly – and Preparing for the Impending Wave of PGRs,” presented at the Cincinnati Bar Association (January 28, 2014)</li>
<li>“Avoiding Court Litigation: IPR After One Year: The Good and the Bad,” “Current Developments in U.S. Patent Damages Since Uniloc,” and “Forum Selection,” presented to AIPPI, Toyko, Japan (November 2013)</li>
<li>“Avoiding Court Litigation: IPR After One Year: The Good and the Bad,” “Current Developments in U.S. Patent Damages Since Uniloc,” and “Forum Selection,” presented to JPAA Kinki Branch Offices, Osaka, Japan (November 2013)</li>
<li>“Strategies for Effectively Responding to Threats of Patent Infringement,” presented to Dayton Intellectual Property Law Association CLE (June 2013)</li>
<li>“CLS Bank v. Alice: Troll Hunt or Witch Hunt?” University of Dayton School of Law 23rd Annual Intellectual Property Seminar (June 2013)</li>
</ul>

Kevin W. Kirsch

Kevin W. Kirsch

Experience

Recognitions and Memberships

Insights and News

Prior Positions

Credentials

Areas of Focus

Enterprise Issues

Industries

Services

Featured Insights