Site Search
Professionals 167 results
Capabilities 35 results
Practice Area
Our Patent Litigation Practice is one of the country’s most active and highly regarded. Our seasoned patent litigators bring extensive courtroom experience to every matter we handle. According to Lex Machina, we are among the top three national patent defense firms in the country for number of appearances and cases filed, and we also were the top national defense firm for number of patent trials in the last five years (2018–2022).
Practice Area
The United States International Trade Commission (ITC) is an increasingly popular venue for patent infringement litigation. More and more companies are seeking to halt importations of infringing products into the United States by turning to the ITC for expedited relief. Section 337 investigations conducted by the ITC provide complainants with a “fast track” to remedy IP matters that typically go to trial within 10 months. Since many Section 337 cases go to trial, selecting an ITC litigation team with a command of the technology, patent law, and specialized procedural practice is extremely important. We have handled more than 100 cases before the ITC.
Practice Area
Winston’s Intellectual Property (IP) Practice is one of the most active and highly regarded in the United States per Chambers USA, Benchmark Litigation US, and Best Law Firms®, among other ranking organizations. Our team features some of the country’s best IP lawyers, attorneys with the technical abilities to litigate and try highly complex IP disputes, and technical lawyers who provide critical advisory services.
Experience 16 results
Experience
|June 25, 2025
Winston Secures Federal Circuit Affirmance of 101 Victory for Polycom
Experience
|April 30, 2025
Insights & News 1,114 results
Client Alert
|August 5, 2025
|2 Min Read
USPTO Tightens IPR Petition Requirements
On July 31, 2025, the USPTO issued a memorandum announcing that, starting from September 1, 2025, it will interpret its own rule 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) as limiting the IPR grounds that can be brought before the Office. Congress provided the USPTO the authority under 35 U.S. Code § 312(a)(4) to promulgate regulations to require certain information in an IPR petition. Pursuant to this provision, the USPTO promulgated Rule 42.104(b)(4), which requires that the petition “specify where each element of the claim is found in the prior art patents or printed publications relied upon.” Though prior administrations applied this clause consistent with the Federal Circuit case law—recently reinforced in Shockwave—that although “only patents and printed publications form the basis of an IPR petition’s unpatentability grounds . . . [applicant admitted prior art] can be important evidence of general background knowledge, and general knowledge can be used to supply a missing claim limitation,” the USPTO is now interpreting its own regulation as not allowing applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) to supply missing claim limitations.
In the Media
|July 2, 2025
|1 Min Read
Kathi Vidal Featured on the Scientista Podcast
Winston & Strawn partner Kathi Vidal was featured on an episode of Scientista, a podcast that highlights candid conversations with women and allies reshaping business, politics, and culture around the world. Kathi spoke with hosts Dr. Sweta Chakraborty and Monica Medina about the systemic inequities that are hindering our society’s ability to address global challenges and how expanding who gets to invent can positively shape the future for all of us.
Client Alert
|June 20, 2025
|2 Min Read
The EPA announced on June 11 its intention to repeal three rules under the Clean Air Act that regulate emissions from power plants. This move comes as part of the Trump Administration’s broad energy and regulatory policy shift aimed at expanding domestic energy production, reducing regulatory burdens, and ensuring affordable, reliable energy, as outlined in Executive Order 14154— “Unleashing American Energy” and Executive Order 14156— “Declaring a National Energy Emergency” issued in January 2025. Critics of the Administration’s strategy fear that adverse impacts may result to the energy industry, public health, and the climate.
Other Results 30 results
Law Glossary
Colloquially referred to as the “patent dance,” the BPCIA provides a framework that includes certain steps and a schedule during which the applicant and reference product sponsor exchange confidential information disclosed in the aBLA. During the patent dance, the applicant and sponsor identify the patents that could be litigated in the future during two potential phases of litigation. In the first phase, the sponsor can allege infringement of a subset of the patents identified during the patent dance. The second phase begins after the sponsor receives the Notice of Commercial Marketing from the applicant. During this second phase, the sponsor can assert any remaining patents that were not asserted in the first phase.
Law Glossary
What Is the Patent Trial and Appeal Board?
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is a tribunal within U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The PTAB oversees trial proceedings, namely: inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR), covered business method (CBM) review, and derivation proceedings. The Board also hears appeals from adverse patentability decisions by patent examiners in original applications, reissues, and reexaminations. And, while phasing out since the passage of the America Invents Act (AIA) in 2011, the PTAB is also responsible for deciding interferences. The PTAB was previously referred to as the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and was renamed by the AIA.
Law Glossary
What Are the Patent Litigation Differences Between the BPCIA and Hatch-Waxman Act?
There are fundamental differences between the abbreviated approval processes to obtain FDA approval for biosimilars and generic drugs as those processes relate to patent litigation.