Associate
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.
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.
2:21-CV-00389, E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap
Koninklijke Philips NV and IP2IPO Innovations, Ltd. v. Boston Scientific Corp.
1:20-cv-01487, D. Del., Judge Noreika
Medmix Switzerland AG v. Kettenbach GmbH and Co. KG et al.
2:21-cv-06613, E.D.N.Y., Judge Reyes
Adolfo R. Arellano v. Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Coney Barrett, Jackson, 21-432, S. Ct.
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
May/June 2026
IP LitigatorArticles
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 LitigatorArticles
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 LitigatorArticles
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 LitigatorArticles
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 LitigatorArticles
Finding Favorable Fora for Foreign Firms Finding Favorable Fora for Foreign Firms
May 9, 2023
IP LitigatorAward/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
Law360Award/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 BarMedia 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 DailyDue to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.