When your company is facing an intellectual property-related dispute, either as the IP owner enforcing your rights or as the accused party, the stakes can be staggering—both financially and in the marketplace. A loss may even put an end to your business. You need an informed risk calculation. You need seasoned IP litigators who bring multifaceted and strategic insights in assessing options and how they could impact your business. You need counsel fully prepared and qualified to handle your case from start to finish. At Finnegan, we have more than 200 attorneys well experienced in all forms of U.S. IP litigation, German patent litigation, and European patent litigation in courts, including the Unified Patent Court, before governmental agencies, and in arbitration forums.
At Finnegan, we understand that “victory” comes through many channels and in many forms. It’s all about achieving our clients’ goals. Our understanding of IP law and focus on obtaining favorable results in claim construction hearings, summary judgment proceedings, contested proceedings, arbitrations, and settlement negotiations means we often resolve cases without going to trial and at considerable savings to clients. Simply stated, a successful litigation outcome is one that meets your business goals in the most cost-efficient manner possible.
Finnegan’s extensive experience drives the insight and tools needed to handle all types of cases—large or small, complex or straightforward, competitor or non-practicing entity. We assess the potential risks and rewards of disputes and provide creative solutions for innovative clients of all sizes, including Fortune 100, startups, and public and private organizations. Our cases have involved issues as complex as human growth hormones, gene therapies, and semiconductor chips. Others have involved more everyday products, like washing machines, trampolines, and makeup brushes.
Even though few IP cases proceed to trial, Finnegan’s attorneys litigate as if we were going to trial from day one. That doesn’t mean indiscriminate discovery and inflated billings. It means putting together the best team and taking a careful and considered look at your case, your goals, the court, the precedents, and the opposition. It means positioning your company for the best outcome at every stage. One of our strengths is extensive insight on experts to use to enhance our clients’ legal positions. Another is experience in trials before juries as well as administrative law judges. IP cases involve distinct substantive and procedural laws, which can be different across venues and jurisdictions. Strategic moves in one case might harm positions in a parallel or appellate proceeding. An experienced, collaborative team that has a comprehensive understanding of IP laws and the associated nuances, as well as dedicated infrastructure and professional staff for supporting IP cases, allows for full focus on the client and learning their products, objectives, working preferences, and vision for success.
Protecting and promoting innovation and market trust is a foundational tenet for Finnegan. Through maintaining a culture of service and leadership in professional bar and legal associations, we collaborate with colleagues in industry and government in promoting IP rights and high professional standards. Organizations we are involved with include American College of Trial Lawyers; American Inns of Court; Association of Intellectual Property Experts (VPP); Federal Bar Association (FBA); Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA); German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property & Copyright (GRUR); International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP); and International Trade Commission Trial Lawyers Association (ITC TLA).
As a highly particularized dispute-resolution venue, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, the National Advertising Division, is best navigated by counsel with vast NAD experience.
Misuse claims raise many of the same issues as antitrust claims, but, if successful, they can result in unenforceability of patents.
Arbitration and other forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) are increasingly used for resolving intellectual property rights disputes and can be particularly effective when parties from different jurisdictions are involved.
Success in Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) litigation in the U.S. often begins months or even years before a case is filed. Whether you are anticipating receipt of a Paragraph IV notice letter or still in late-stage clinical trials, it is never too early to start preparation.
To maintain a competitive advantage, companies and organizations need clear guidance in German, UK, and US intellectual property law and creative solutions to protect their copyrighted works.
Counterfeiting and gray market goods are growing at an alarming rate, resulting in industry losses of billions of dollars annually.
Your designs separate you from the competition, make your products distinctive, and help preserve your competitive advantage.
Because of the pervasive nature and extent of cybersquatting and infringement activity on the Internet, you need to manage and set priorities for enforcement efforts by developing specific guidelines and strategies.
In fast-moving, high-pressure mergers, acquisitions, partnering, and investment transactions, obtaining an accurate and comprehensive intellectual property evaluation is critical.
Appeals require meticulous attention to the details involved and demand a thorough understanding of appellate law to identify the one or two arguments with the most promise to persuade.
Since cases before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) go to trial faster than cases tried in almost any other forum in the world, they can be the first to be resolved in multi-forum disputes and often spearhead resolution of the other related cases.
To align litigation strategy with business goals might mean settling on reasonable terms as early as possible, or alternatively, sending a message to industry competitors through aggressive enforcement or defensive strategies.
It begins with frank and honest conversations, listening carefully to better understand your business objectives, your options, your risk tolerance, and your ultimate goals.
From data gathering to data storage, from privacy by design to governance and legal compliance, all industries and sectors are faced with complex and often unsettled issues related to privacy.
Trial strategy and procedures differ significantly in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) depending on your position—as a petitioner challenging a patent's validity or as a patent owner defending your rights.
A Standard Essential Patent (SEP) is an invention that is incorporated into the standard for a certain technology. Handling SEP litigation and license negotiations requires a particular type of experience.
Intense competition, employee mobility, and the proliferation of spin-off and startup businesses make the trade secret protection critical.
When problems arise and valuable trademark rights are at stake or an accusation has been made, it pays to have seasoned litigators and trial lawyers on your side.
In protecting your brand assets, trademark opposition and cancellation proceedings are effective offensive and defensive strategic tools.
The Unified Patent Court opened for business on 1 June 2023, revolutionizing the way in which patents are litigated in Europe.
View Unitary Patent System (UPS) and the Unified Patent Court (UPC)
Achieved a comprehensive victory for respondent Innoscience, a global leader in gallium nitride (GaN) power devices, in a high-profile patent dispute before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC’s Final Determination confirms that Innoscience avoided all patent claims asserted by Infineon.
337‑TA‑1414, ITC, Judge Moore
Persuaded the court that asserted claims directed to an alleged form of geofencing technology were ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court found the patent invalid and dismissed the case against client Audi with prejudice in the first instance.
4:25-cv-11147, E.D. Mich., Judge Behm
Obtained a $240 million jury verdict for client Promptu in a patent infringement lawsuit against Comcast. The jury found that Comcast willfully infringed Promptu’s patents covering voice recognition technology for TV.
2:16-cv-06516, E.D. Pa., Judge Sanchez
22-1939, Fed. Cir., Judges Prost, Moore, Taranto
Secured a decisive victory for client US Synthetic Corp. (USS) at the ITC. After a full hearing, the ALJ found that respondents infringed multiple claims of USS’s patent and that the claims were valid and supported by a domestic industry, but an initial Commission ruling under § 101 temporarily prevented a finding of violation of Section 337. The Federal Circuit reversed the § 101 ruling, and on remand the ITC found a violation and issued a limited exclusion order barring infringing polycrystalline diamond products from entry into the United States, securing final relief for USS.
337-TA-1236, ITC, Judge Elliot
Obtained complete victory against Carrum on appeal of the District of Delaware’s claim construction to the Federal Circuit following Carrum’s stipulation of non-infringement under the claim construction, thereby exonerating BMW’s ACC system, first sold in 2000, against Carrum’s 2004 patents. Invalidated several asserted claims through post-grant efforts before the U.S. Patent Office, including IPRs and EPRs, and pursued claims through proceedings before the Eastern District of Virginia to vindicate BMW’s patent challenges.
1:18-cv-01645, D. Del., Judge Andrews
21-1435, 24-1480, Fed. Cir., Judges Clevenger, Cunningham, Lourie, Moore, Prost, Taranto
IPR2019-00902, -00903, -00904, -00905, -00927, 00928, PTAB, Judges Browne, Scanlon, Tornquist
90/019,010, CRU
IL-2024-000026, UK High Court
European IP Blog
UPC Central Division Revokes Patent Covering Covid-19 Treatment Remdesivir
8 June 2026
Hybrid Conference
Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – California
October 19-20, 2026
San Francisco
Hybrid Conference
Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – New York
September 28-29, 2026
New York
Press Release
London-Based Life Sciences Litigator Jin Ooi Bolsters Finnegan’s Global IP Litigation Capabilities
June 8, 2026
Award/Ranking
June 5, 2026
Award/Ranking
Finnegan Earns Top Rankings in 2026 IAM Patent 1000 Guide; Nearly 60 Attorneys Ranked
May 28, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.