Joyce Craig practices patent litigation in federal courts and at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), and participates in post-grant proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Her focus is in the consumer products, electronics, and information technology fields. She regularly handles cases involving standards-essential patents.
Ms. Craig's broad experience in U.S. district courts and the ITC includes jury and bench trials; examining witnesses and handling oral arguments; taking and defending depositions; coordinating expert discovery; and participating in hearings, judicial conferences, and mock trials. In addition, she has authored numerous briefs and motions on a wide range of issues, including appeal, mediation, claim construction, summary judgment, and significant discovery issues such as sanctions.
Before attending law school, Ms. Craig spent 14 years working internationally as a computer programmer and project manager in the field of software development.
Ms. Craig serves as an assistant editor of the Last Month at the Federal Circuit, Finnegan's monthly newsletter distributed to subscribers worldwide. She is also a professorial lecturer in law at The George Washington University Law School, where she teaches Scholarly Writing to student editors of the AIPLA Quarterly Journal.
- One-Blue LLC v. Imation Corp. (D. Del.). Currently represents plaintiff in a suit involving patents essential to Blu-ray disc standards.
- Wi-LAN USA, Inc. v. Toshiba Corp. (S.D. Fla.). Currently represents defendants in a suit involving digital televisions.
- Certain Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing Same, 337-TA-784, -785 (ITC). Represented respondents LG Electronics and related companies in investigations regarding light emitting diodes. The cases ultimately settled.
- Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras and Components Thereof, 337-TA-703 (ITC). Helped respondent Research in Motion to prevail on its invalidity defense in a case involving camera technology in handheld BlackBerry devices.
- WebXchange Inc. v. FedEx Corp. (D. Del.). Assisted defendant to settle case favorably; primarily responsible for developing inequitable conduct defense.
- U.S. Philips Corp. v. International Norcent Technology, Inc. (C.D. Cal.). Helped to obtained jury verdict in favor of plaintiff, including treble damages and attorneys' fees, in case involving manufacture and sale of unlicensed DVD players and involving patents essential to DVD standards.
- U.S. Philips Corp. v. KXD Technology, Inc. (C.D. Cal.). Helped to obtain entry of judgment of treble damages for plaintiff just days before the start of trial as a sanction for failure of discovery. The case involved the manufacture and sale of unlicensed DVD players and involved patents essential to DVD standards.
- U.S. Philips Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co. (D. Del.). Assisted plaintiff to obtain favorable settlement in case involving JPEG image compression.
- Served as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr., U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, 2004-2005.
- Devotes time to pro bono matters, representing criminal defendants and tenants in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
- Recipient of the American Bar Association/Bureau of National Affairs Award for Excellence in the Study of Intellectual Property Law, 2004.
- DC Bar (elected member, Steering Committee, Intellectual Property Law Section, 2011-2014; co-chair, 2012-2013)
- American Intellectual Property Law Association
- American Bar Association (DC delegate to Young Lawyers Division, 2008-2009)
- Coauthor. "2011 Patent Law Decisions of the Federal Circuit," American University Law Review, April 10, 2012.
- Coauthor. "Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments 2010," ABA Section of Intellectual Property Law, March 14, 2011.
- Coauthor. "2009 Patent Law Decisions of the Federal Circuit," American University Law Review, April 30, 2010.
- "Disclaimer of Laptop Computers during Patent Prosecution Results in Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement," Common Law Journal, April 15, 2008.
- "Lower Court Should Have Explained Post-Verdict Damages Award Against Microsoft," Common Law Journal, March 8, 2008.