直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
Alexander E. Harding
Associate
More
vCard
  • 901 New York Avenue, NW
  • Washington, DC 20001-4413
+1 202 408 4324
alexander.harding@finnegan.com alexander.harding@finnegan.com

Alexander E. Harding

Associate

  • +1 202 408 4324 +1 202 408 4324
  • alexander.harding@finnegan.com alexander.harding@finnegan.com
  • 901 New York Avenue, NW
  • Washington, DC 20001-4413
  • vCard

Alex Harding's practice spans the full field of patent law, with experience before U.S. district courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit as well as the U.S. Supreme Court. His technical background is in electrical engineering, and he has focused his practice on electronic and industrial devices.

Alex counsels both domestic and foreign clients. A significant portion of his practice is devoted to pre-litigation activities, opinion preparation on issues relating to infringement and validity, patent infringement litigation, and inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent Office and Trademark Office (USPTO). He has prepared complaints, motions, briefs, and appeals; handled motion practice; argued claim construction; taken and defended depositions; led strategy calls; and managed discovery teams.

As an undergraduate student, Alex worked for the Biomechatronics Group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to develop optogenetic muscle controllers, which may allow robotic legs and arms to transmit sensations felt by the limb back to a user. He also worked with a cardiac research team at the Johns Hopkins Hospital to develop a novel internal defibrillation device, which uses high voltage alternating current (HVAC) to reduce the pain felt by the patient during defibrillation.

Alex devotes a considerable portion of his time to pro bono matters. He works extensively with military veterans and has represented them and their service organizations before the Federal Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. He has been frequently recognized on the Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll.

Et Cetera

  • Author. “Rehabilitation or Enhancement? FDA & the Gene Therapies of Tomorrow,” Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Spring 2020.
  • Author. “Maryland Seeks to Expand Complete Streets Program to Prioritize Food Access,” Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation, Food Law & Policy Clinic, Feb. 2019.
  • Author. “Shedding Light on the Obviousness of Gene Patents,”Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Jan. 2018.
  • Coauthor. “Transdermal Optogenetic Peripheral Nerve Stimulation,” Journal of Neural Engineering, March 14, 2017.
  • Article editor, speakers editor, and citation manager for the Harvard Journal of Law & Technology (JOLT), 2016-2019.
  • Team leader for the Harvard Law Entrepreneurship Project (HLEP), 2016-2017.
  • Author. “An Anonymous Letter to Professor Godfrey,” University Affairs, Opinion, Student Voices, February 4, 2015.
  • 3M National Student Fellow, 2014.

Experience

US Synthetic Corporation (USS) v. International Trade Commission (ITC)

Secured a significant victory for client US Synthetic Corporation (USS) with a precedential decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) overturning an unfavorable 35 U.S.C. § 101 eligibility ruling from the International Trade Commission (ITC).

23-1217, Fed. Cir., Judges Chen, Dyk, Stoll

In Re Certain Polycrystalline Diamond Compacts and Articles Containing Same

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

Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. Toyota Motor Corp. et al.

Represented defendant Toyota in a patent infringement case that brought eleven utility patents against Toyota’s vehicles in the United States. After Toyota obtained IPR institutions against 8 of the 11 asserted patents, the parties settled.

2:21-CV-00389, E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap

Koninklijke Philips NV and IP2IPO Innovations, Ltd. v. Boston Scientific Corp.

Represented Plaintiffs Koninklijke Philips NV and IP2IPO Innovations, Ltd. against Boston Scientific in patent suit involving medical devices.

1:20-cv-01487, D. Del., Judge Noreika

Medmix Switzerland AG v. Kettenbach GmbH and Co. KG et al.

Represented defendants Kettenbach GmbH and Co. KG, Kettenbach LP and Xinial Systems GmbH and Co. KG in a case brought against the Defendants’ dental products for patent and trademark infringement, as well as false advertising, in the United States. After Defendants obtained a final written decision from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) finding all asserted patent claims in the case to be unpatentable, the parties settled.

2:21-cv-06613, E.D.N.Y., Judge Reyes

Adolfo R. Arellano v. Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Represented the veteran in an appeal to expand access to equitable tolling for claimants who are unable to timely file their claims.

Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Coney Barrett, Jackson, 21-432, S. Ct.

More

Insights

Articles

Choice of Law in Patent Appeals: The Federal Circuit’s Issue-by-Issue Framework

Choice of Law in Patent Appeals: The Federal Circuit’s Issue-by-Issue Framework Choice of Law in Patent Appeals: The Federal Circuit’s Issue-by-Issue Framework

May/June 2026

IP Litigator

Articles

Section 337 After Lashify: Practical Implications for Non-U.S. Companies: What the Federal Circuit’s March 2025 Decision Means for Those Who Can Credibly Bring an ITC Case

Section 337 After Lashify: Practical Implications for Non-U.S. Companies: What the Federal Circuit’s March 2025 Decision Means for Those Who Can Credibly Bring an ITC Case Section 337 After Lashify: Practical Implications for Non-U.S. Companies: What the Federal Circuit’s March 2025 Decision Means for Those Who Can Credibly Bring an ITC Case

November/December 2025

IP Litigator

Articles

Structuring Patent Royalties to Avoid Unnecessary U.S. Customs Duties: Lessons from CBP Rulings

Structuring Patent Royalties to Avoid Unnecessary U.S. Customs Duties: Lessons from CBP Rulings Structuring Patent Royalties to Avoid Unnecessary U.S. Customs Duties: Lessons from CBP Rulings

May/June 2025

IP Litigator

Articles

Recovering for Foreign Sales on a U.S. Patent: The Global Implications of the Federal Circuit’s Recent Decision in Brumfield

Recovering for Foreign Sales on a U.S. Patent: The Global Implications of the Federal Circuit’s Recent Decision in Brumfield Recovering for Foreign Sales on a U.S. Patent: The Global Implications of the Federal Circuit’s Recent Decision in Brumfield

September/October 2024

IP Litigator

Articles

Using Statements from Foreign Patent Office Proceedings to Construe U.S. Patent Claims

Using Statements from Foreign Patent Office Proceedings to Construe U.S. Patent Claims Using Statements from Foreign Patent Office Proceedings to Construe U.S. Patent Claims

September/October 2023

IP Litigator

Articles

Finding Favorable Fora for Foreign Firms

Finding Favorable Fora for Foreign Firms Finding Favorable Fora for Foreign Firms

May 9, 2023

IP Litigator
More

News

Award/Ranking

61 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2025 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 61 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2025 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll

May 7, 2026

Press Release

U.S. International Trade Commission Issues Limited Exclusion Order for US Synthetic in Investigation Against Foreign Diamond Makers U.S. International Trade Commission Issues Limited Exclusion Order for US Synthetic in Investigation Against Foreign Diamond Makers

December 23, 2025

Media Mention

ITC Bans Infringing Drill Bit Imports After Fed. Circ. Remand ITC Bans Infringing Drill Bit Imports After Fed. Circ. Remand

December 5, 2025

Law360

Award/Ranking

56 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2024 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 56 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2024 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll

April 24, 2025

DC Bar

Media Mention

Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout Outs: US Synthetic Corp. Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout Outs: US Synthetic Corp.

February 21, 2025

The AmLaw Litigation Daily

Press Release

Federal Circuit Overturns ITC Ruling to Give US Synthetic a Significant Victory Federal Circuit Overturns ITC Ruling to Give US Synthetic a Significant Victory

February 20, 2025

More

Professional Activities

  • Giles S. Rich American Inn of Court
    (treasurer, 2024-present)
  • Federal Circuit Bar Association
Admissions and Education

Admissions

  • District of Columbia
  • Massachusetts
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Veterans Claims
  • Supreme Court of the United States

Education

Harvard Law School
J.D., cum laude, 2019
Dalhousie University
B. Eng., Electrical Engineering, with highest distinction, 2016

Alexander's Practices

AI + Finnegan
AI + Patent
Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals
ITC Section 337 Investigations and Trials
Patent Litigation and Trials
Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR
Prosecution and Portfolio Management
Opinions and Counseling

Alexander's Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML)
Robotics
Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
Manufacturing
Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure
Gaming
Life Sciences
Medical Device and Diagnostics

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP