The Wolf Greenfield Summer Program gives aspiring attorneys a firsthand look at life inside of a thriving law firm. Participants are assigned to a specific Wolf Greenfield practice group, but they are also exposed to multiple practices to offer a 360-degree view of the firm’s diverse services. 

This year’s program featured nine associates and one technology specialist intern. Four of them are featured on this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield: 

• Neha Krishna: a rising senior at the University of Pennsylvania
• Ben Nickerson: attends the Northeastern University School of Law
• Katie Schneider: attends the University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law
• Katherine Wade: attends the Chicago-Kent Law School and is a Patent Paralegal in the Biotechnology practice group

Here are a few highlights of their conversation.

01:10 - How the associates heard about Wolf Greenfield’s Summer Program and what led each to apply

03:12 - One of Neha’s favorite projects this summer

03:57 - Katie and Katherine discuss how the summer program has prepared them for what’s next in their legal career

05:28 - What surprised Ben this summer

06:46 - Advice for those considering the summer program 

###

Artificial intelligence has extraordinary potential, but it also presents a number of daunting challenges. One is the high energy consumption of the computer chips required to drive the programs. Lightmatter is developing unique photonic technologies that reconstruct how computer chips calculate and communicate, allowing data to move at much higher speeds than is possible today. The young company has raised over $420 million to date and is now valued at over $1.2B. 

Dr. Darius Bunandar is founder and chief scientist of Lightmatter. He and his team have worked closely with Wolf Greenfield in recent years to develop and execute a strategy to protect its intellectual property. Randy Pritzker co-chairs the Electrical & Computer Technologies Practice at Wolf Greenfield.

In this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, Darius and Randy discuss how AI and supercomputing may be transformed by Lightmatter’s photonic technologies and how IP has assisted Lightmatter.

01:31 - Darius provides background about Lightmatter and the company’s most recent developments

03:04 - Randy explains why IP is valuable to Lightmatter and gives an overview of the company’s IP strategy

06:57 - Darius and Randy discuss the teamwork that’s necessary to develop and execute an effective IP strategy

09:34 - Randy examines how the IP strategy has helped Lightmatter, both in the early years and how it has changed as the company has matured

11:43 - Having just reached unicorn status with a $1.2 billion valuation, Lightmatter is excited about the future

12:18 - Darius and Randy enjoy working with each other

Meaghan Luster focuses her practice at Wolf Greenfield on patent litigation. Meaghan’s experience includes conducting pre-suit diligence, fact and expert discovery, claim construction, and motion practice in US district courts and the US International Trade Commission (ITC). Prior to joining Wolf Greenfield, Meaghan served as a judicial law clerk for Judge George O’Toole, Jr. of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

In this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, Meaghan Luster discusses her first year working in patent litigation.

00:49 - Highlights from Meaghan’s first year at Wolf Greenfield

01:26 - The most rewarding and challenging aspects of patent litigation

02:18 - The advantages of working every day with top clients and new areas of technology and law

02:49 - Meaghan’s work spans a range of technologies from pharmaceuticals to medical devices to software

03:25 - Communicating with jury members that are often not technical people

05:18 - How time as a judicial law clerk prepared Meaghan for her current practice

06:19 - Meaghan’s involvement in diversity and inclusion initiatives

07:27 - How Wolf Greenfield’s commitment to diversity and inclusion is unique

###

John Harmon is a shareholder in both the Mechanical and Chemical & Materials Technologies Practices at  Wolf Greenfield. He represents clients in industry and academia in a wide range of technologies related to the mechanical, materials, and chemistry fields. One area of particular interest these days is the evolving impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on intellectual property matters. 

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently issued its “Inventorship Guidance for AI-Assisted Inventions.” This guidance is pursuant to President Biden's Executive Order last fall on the “safe, secure, and trustworthy development and use of AI.”

In this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, John Harmon offers perspective on these early days of AI application.

01:06 - A summary of the latest guidance from the USPTO

06:05 - An overview of the Thaler v. Vidal case

06:53 - What further action might be taken in the future to address the President's concerns?

09:01 - What constitutes an "invention" and how does AI muddy the waters?

11:59 - File earlier rather than later

12:52 - Simply applying AI to a problem doesn’t constitute patentable subject matter

14:29 - The issues that need to be considered when AI and robotics are used together

16:13 - Suggestions for moving forward with AI

###

Rob Sahr is a shareholder in Wolf Greenfield’s Biotechnology Practice. He develops strategies for life science companies to maximize exclusivity for therapeutic and diagnostic products. Rob has also assisted federal grant recipients and contractors with Bayh-Dole compliance.

Originally passed at the end of 1980, the Bayh–Dole Act permits ownership by contractors of inventions arising from federal government-funded research. In recent months, the Biden Administration has seemed intent on more aggressively exercising “march-in rights” under the Act to promote affordability of taxpayer-funded inventions.

In this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, Rob provides insight on recent developments regarding Bayh-Dole compliance. Here are the highlights.

00:59 - On the contentiousness of Bayh-Dole

03:06 - What is a subject invention and why are they the source of so much confusion?

04:59 - Defining “march-in rights” and how are they different from “taking title” 

06:16 - The four requirements of march-in rights 

07:04 - Explaining “timely disclosure” and its importance

08:34 - Implications of the recent University of South Florida case

10:28 - Enforcing the requirements around utilization reports and how the Presidential election might factor into the equation

###

Scott McKeown is a shareholder in Wolf Greenfield’s Post-Grant Proceedings Practice. Based in the firm’s Washington, DC office, Scott focuses his practice on high-stakes matters before the US Patent Trial & Appeal Board, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and related patent litigation matters. Recognized as one of the top PTAB trial attorneys in the US, Scott is also a frequent speaker and author on various intellectual property topics and his award-winning blog can be followed at PatentsPostGrant.com.

In this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, Scott offers his insight on some of the biggest PTAB developments over the past year and things to watch in 2024. Here are the highlights.

01:07 - Scott gives an overview of 2023 PTAB changes and explains how they have changed the practice

03:32 - PTAB developments that Scott is monitoring this year

05:41 - Scott offers some helpful tips for in-house counsel in light of the Federal Circuit’s In re Cellect ruling 

07:31 - Exciting times ahead for Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC office

###

We’re pleased to feature May Rohrbach in this episode of Wolf Greenfield’s Alumni Spotlight series. May was previously a patent agent in Wolf Greenfield’s Electrical & Computer Technologies Practice. She was also part of the firm’s technology specialist intern program. 

Now, May serves as a QA Engineer II at Blink, an Amazon Company. Blink delivers affordable, innovative, and easy-to-use smart home security devices.

Here are some highlights from May’s turn in the Alumni Spotlight on IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield.

00:47 - An overview of May’s current responsibilities

01:45 - How May’s current position differs from being at a law firm

03:03 - May’s role at Wolf Greenfield prepared her for her current position at Blink

04:08 - Her favorite Wolf Greenfield memories

05:11 - May’s favorite book

05:57 - Dream destination

2024 is upon us and it’s going to be another busy year for intellectual property law. In this episode of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, you’ll hear Wolf Greenfield attorneys from a variety of practice areas offering their insights on what to expect in the months ahead. Here are some of the highlights.

01:06 - Jeff Hsi commented on the impact the Amgen v. Sanofi decision may have on the biotech and pharmaceutical industries in 2024. 

01:59 - Jonathan Roses with thoughts on the In re Cellect case. 

03:11 - Following the Columbia Sportswear case, Jen Wang discusses the importance of choosing a good title in a design patent application.

04:04 - John Harmon on artificial intelligence (AI) and the importance of filing patent applications in a timely manner.

04:57 - In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Jack Daniels case, John Strand’s thoughts on the line between free expression under the First Amendment and trademark law.

05:56 - John Welch previews the Vidal v. Elster trademark case to be decided by the Supreme Court in 2024.

06:43 - Scott McKeown on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) much anticipated updated rules package.

07:32 - Zach Piccolomini expects a great deal of focus on the new Unified Patent Court (UPC) and European unitary patent. 

08:27 - Ed Russavage offers some thoughts on how President Biden’s Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence may impact IP, including some patent and copyright issues. 

09:24 - With a number of cases challenging the drug pricing scheme in the Inflation Reduction Act, Dan Young comments on the possible implications for a company’s patent strategy.

10:11 - Rob Sahr on the Biden Administration’s Executive Order stating that “when new technologies and products are developed with support from the US Government, they will be manufactured in the United States whenever feasible and consistent with applicable law.” 

11:32 - Libbie DiMarco says 2024 may see a rise in Section 337 non-patent claims before the ITC.

###

Libbie DiMarco is a shareholder at Wolf Greenfield and, along with Dan Young, co-chair of the firm's Washington, DC office. Libbie is an intellectual property litigator focusing her practice primarily on complex patent litigation in Federal District Court and before the US International Trade Commission (ITC). 

In this episode of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, Libbie highlights the impressive growth already taking place in the DC office and looks ahead to 2024. Here are the highlights.

01:02 - The reasons that led to Wolf Greenfield opening a Washington, DC office

02:13 - Growth in the DC office has been impressive

03:42 - Co-chairing the office with Dan Young

04:41 - 2023 developments at the ITC

06:03 - Advice for navigating the latest changes at the ITC 

06:52 - Best practices for indemnification

###

Bryan Conley is a shareholder and experienced litigator at Wolf Greenfield who focuses his practice on intellectual property matters at the agency, trial, and appellate levels. He regularly represents high profile technology clients at trial concerning their most challenging patent matters.

One area of intense interest lately has been Section 337 investigations. These investigations into unfair import practices are conducted by the US International Trade Commission and most often involve claims regarding intellectual property rights, including allegations of patent infringement and trademark infringement by imported goods. 

In this episode of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, Bryan offers a detailed look at Section 337. Here are some of the highlights.

00:56 - Bryan provides an overview of Section 337 investigations

02:41 - Factors driving the increase in questions related to public interest 

05:27 - Examples of public interest factors that the Commission considers

06:28 - The role of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)

07:38 - Bryan explains why the ITC is more willing to delegate public interest fact finding to the ALJ when standard essential patents (SEPs) are involved 

08:52 - Why it’s critical for private parties to create a public interest record and what should be included in that record

10:32 - Recent impactful public interest Section 337 cases

12:39 - It’s important for respondents to act quickly to highlight the significance of public interest factors after a complaint is filed

13:57 - The top four statutory factors that are important when developing a public interest strategy and related arguments

15:23 - Bryan describes “tailoring” 

16:31 - Final suggestions on preparing for and dealing with public interest Section 337 issues