Print PDF

Barbara Clarke McCurdy
+1 202 408 4047
barbara.mccurdy@finnegan.com

901 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001-4413

+1 202 408 4000
Fax +1 202 408 4400

Bar and Court Admissions

  • District of Columbia
  • Massachusetts
  • U.S. District Court, District of Columbia
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Education

  • Suffolk University Law School
    J.D., cum laude, 1985
  • Duke University
    B.S.E., Mechanical Engineering, 1982

Barbara Clarke McCurdy

Partner

Barbara McCurdy, chairman of Finnegan and former managing partner, has more than 25 years of experience creating, enforcing, and defending patent rights, with a particular focus on patent litigation, patent counseling, and contested patent proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). She has been lead trial counsel in patent cases in the U.S. district courts, appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), and contested proceedings at the USPTO. Her cases have involved a wide range of technologies, including computers, software, semiconductors, medical devices, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals.

Ms. McCurdy's experience before the USPTO includes leading more than 20 contested proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) (formerly the U.S. Board of Appeals and Patent Interferences). In addition to inter partes proceedings before the USPTO involving challenges to patentability and priority of invention, she also has been lead counsel in district court actions under 35 U.S.C. § 146 reviewing USPTO Board decisions and district court actions under 35 U.S.C. § 291 involving interfering patents. She has lectured extensively around the world on the strategic interplay between the new USPTO post-grant proceedings and litigation in district courts and the ITC.

Ms. McCurdy provides a range of patent counseling, including strategic patent prosecution, validity and infringement opinions, patent portfolio management, and litigation strategy. She develops strategies that meet the business goals of clients, including advising them on building patent portfolios in significant new technology areas, developing IP positions that take into account the IP landscape, advising on acquisitions or licensing of technology, and developing offensive and defensive litigation strategies.

Ms. McCurdy has taught patent law to hundreds of law school students and USPTO contested proceedings practice to hundreds of patent attorneys.

Highlights

  • Roche Diagnostics v. Home Diagnostics (S.D. Ind.). Defended Home Diagnostics, a manufacturer of blood testing equipment, against infringement allegations by competitor. Obtained summary judgment of noninfringement of one patent and a holding of unenforceability of the other patent following a bench trial.
  • LifeScan v. Home Diagnostics (D. Del., N.D. Cal., Fed. Cir.). Defended Home Diagnostics in patent infringement lawsuits, securing judgments of noninfringement from two district courts, which were affirmed on appeal.
  • Certain Pesticides and Products Containing Clothianidin, 337-TA-635 (ITC). Represented respondent Syngenta in a Section 337 investigation in which Sumitomo was seeking to exclude Syngenta agricultural products from the U.S.; successfully argued for termination of the proceeding by the ALJ and the full ITC.
  • Vas-Cath v. University of Missouri (USPTO, D.D.C., W.D. Mo., Fed. Cir.). Represented the University of Missouri in a patent interference related to hemodialysis catheters before the USPTO, two district courts, and the Federal Circuit; judgment of priority was awarded in favor of the client and against Vas-Cath.
  • Eggleston v. Lazaridis (USPTO). Represented Research in Motion (Lazaridis) in a patent interference provoked by rival Motorola (Eggleston) attempting to challenge early RIM patents; judgment entered against Motorola and in favor of client RIM.
  • Voglewede v. Lee (USPTO). Represented LG (Lee) in a patent interference provoked by competitor Whirlpool (Voglewede) attempting to challenge LG refrigerator patents; judgment entered against Whirlpool and in favor of client LG.

Professional Activities

  • American Bar Association (Section on Intellectual Property)
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Federal Circuit Bar Association