Partner
Charles Collins-Chase, co-leader of Finnegan’s Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy Section, focuses on district court patent litigation and appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where he served as a clerk. He is a first-chair litigator who has handled cases at every stage, from pre-litigation through discovery, dispositive motions, and trial. In the courtroom, Charles has argued at Markman hearings, examined key expert witnesses, argued judgement as a matter of law (JMOL) and other motions, and given openings.
Charles uses his chemical engineering background to support clients in protecting their innovations across a wide range of technologies, including pharmaceuticals and biotechnologies, energy and renewables, and chemical products. He has assisted numerous clients in Hatch-Waxman (ANDA) and Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) litigations. Charles also counsels clients on using artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) systems for drug discovery and development.
Charles has extensive experience at the Federal Circuit, where he has argued cases and assisted clients in more than thirty appeals from decisions by district courts and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). He has particular insight into appeals involving patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, having represented the petitioners in Bilski v. Kappos before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Charles also has substantial experience representing clients in post-grant proceedings at the PTAB. In his roles as lead inter partes review (IPR) counsel, he has deposed and defended key experts witnesses and inventors, drafted petitions and patent owner responses, and argued at oral hearings.
With broad expertise in clean energy and renewable technologies, Charles has handled litigation, appeals, and due diligence matters involving technologies ranging from renewable diesel fuel and biofuels to pollution control systems and biobased polymers. Before law school, Charles completed an M.Phil. in engineering for sustainable development at the University of Cambridge, where he researched the feasibility of community-scale biodiesel production using a novel reactor system. His undergraduate thesis research involved synthesizing and characterizing thermosetting polymers made from soybean oil and other renewable resources.
Charles devotes substantial time to pro bono matters and has served as the leader of the firm’s pro bono committee. He argues before the Federal Circuit on behalf of veterans seeking service-connected disability benefits.
Bial - Portela & CA S.A. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd et al.
Represented Bial in district court Hatch-Waxman litigation involving the anti-epileptic drug Aptiom®.
1:18-cv-00304, D. Del., Judges Connolly, Burke
Bay Materials, LLC v. 3M Company
1:21-cv-01610, D. Del., Judges Andrews, Hall
AbbVie Inc. et al v. Alvotech hf.
1:21-cv-02258, 1:21-cv-02899, N.D. Ill., Judge Lee
Daicel Corporation v. Celanese International Corp.
Successfully represented Celanese International Corp. as lead counsel in two Federal Circuit appeals from IPR proceedings involving industrial acetic acid production, obtaining affirmance of the PTAB’s rulings in Celanese’s favor.
18-2130, -2131, Fed. Cir.
E. I. du Pont de Nemours v. Synvina C.V.
Represented DuPont and ADM in a successful Federal Circuit appeal from an IPR proceeding, resulting in reversal of the PTAB’s decision and invalidation of all challenged claims of Synvina’s patent directed to production of 2,5-furan dicarboxylic acid.
17-1977, Fed. Cir.
Dialware Communications, LLC v. Hasbro, Inc.
Lead counsel for Dialware Communications in a Federal Circuit appeal from a district court decision invalidating five patents under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
17-1952, Fed. Cir.
Articles
Skinny Labels, Larger Risks: Supreme Court Considers Induced Infringement Standards in Hikma v. Amarin Skinny Labels, Larger Risks: Supreme Court Considers Induced Infringement Standards in Hikma v. Amarin
March 3, 2026
Westlaw TodayArticles
Artificial Intelligence IP Protection Needs Updated Approaches Artificial Intelligence IP Protection Needs Updated Approaches
April 22, 2025
Bloomberg LawSeminar
Intellectual Property in the Age of AI: What Do You Own and How Do You Balance Risks? Intellectual Property in the Age of AI: What Do You Own and How Do You Balance Risks?
September 25, 2024
Boston
Articles
Regulation and Legislation in the Era of Automation and Digitalisation Regulation and Legislation in the Era of Automation and Digitalisation
June 7, 2024
European Pharmaceutical ReviewConference
Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation Europe 2024 Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation Europe 2024
January 22-24, 2024
Amsterdam
Articles
The Future of AI in the Pharmaceutical Industry The Future of AI in the Pharmaceutical Industry
April 27, 2023
European Pharmaceutical ManufacturerCommentary
Justices to Side with Generic Drugmakers in Patent Spat, Attorneys Predict Justices to Side with Generic Drugmakers in Patent Spat, Attorneys Predict
May 5, 2026
Westlaw TodayCommentary
Supreme Court Takes Up Generic Drug Labeling Fight Supreme Court Takes Up Generic Drug Labeling Fight
April 29, 2026
AxiosCommentary
The Topics Appellate Attys Are Tracking Most Closely in 2026 The Topics Appellate Attys Are Tracking Most Closely in 2026
January 2, 2026
Law360Press Release
Finnegan Exceeds $3M in Donations to DAV Finnegan Exceeds $3M in Donations to DAV
February 13, 2025
Press Release
46 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2021 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 46 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2021 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll
June 3, 2022
Commentary
Finnegan Taps Its Federal Circuit Chops for Military Vets in Disability Cases Finnegan Taps Its Federal Circuit Chops for Military Vets in Disability Cases
August 16, 2021
The AmLaw Litigation DailyDue to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.