Breaking News

United States, Mexico withdraw 2027 women’s World Cup bid to focus on 2031 US and Mexico will curb illegal immigration, leaders say The US finds that five Israeli security units committed human rights violations before the start of the Gaza war What do protesting students at American universities want? NFL Draft grades for all 32 teams | Zero Blitz Phil Simms, Boomer Esiason came out on ‘NFL Today’, former QB Matt Ryan came in Antony J. Blinken Secretary for Information – US Department of State The US economy is cooling down. Why experts say there’s no reason to worry yet US troops will leave Chad as another African country reassesses ties 2024 NFL Draft Grades, Day 2 Tracker: Analysis of Every Pick in the Second Round

To print this article, you just need to be registered or logged in at Mondaq.com.

How would you describe

practice?

I have a life science litigation practice with a focus on

patent dispute process (PTAB, district court, and appeal

to the Federal Circuit). Since the beginning of my career, my case

mainly involves biology and biotech life sciences. In

in particular, I have filed many cases of recombinant proteins, antibodies,

fusion proteins, and medical device boxes.

How long have you been practicing in front of the

USPTO and in front of PTAB?

I have been training in front of the USPTO since 1999. Early

in my career, I advise clients on patent claim strategies for

prepare for litigation. Before PTAB was created, I was

involved with ex parte and inter parte re-examination, and

interference process in front of BPAI. From the start

from PTAB, I have acted as lead advisor on many CBM and IPR

process, and more recently, in the PGR process. We even

successfully appealed the CBM case to the Federal Circuit on an issue

from first impression.

What is the biggest difference between

practice in front of PTAB and the district

court?

I find the process controversial before PTAB more

similar to the inquisitorial process, where APJ is there for

ensure their understanding of the truth, not on

traditional adversarial process of district court litigation. The

APJ is a sophisticated technical fact-finder and tends to bring a

their technical background into their fact-finding process.

Without a jury present, rhetoric is less important. For example,

during the oral hearing, I hope to jump straight to the facts

to answer APJ’s questions and point them towards us

truth.

What do you enjoy about training at Arnold &

Porter?

Overall, I enjoyed the culture at Arnold & Porter. I enjoy

work with my colleagues, who are very smart, but also

bring a good sense of humor to the workplace. I also appreciate

that I can count on my colleagues to do the right thing.

What do you like to do in your free time

time?

I love traveling abroad and new destinations to meet new people

people. I’ve started climbing more, and am getting ready to a

9 day Inca Trail hike to Machu Picchu. But above all, I enjoy

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *