Associate
Matthew Karas focuses on a wide range of intellectual property (IP) matters, concentrating on patent portfolio management, patent prosecution, and patent application drafting while leveraging his experience with district court litigation and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proceedings. He works primarily with companies developing electrical and computer technologies, including automobile networking devices, artificial intelligence (AI) software, user application software, and digital health products. Matt has extensive experience with patent prosecution and has orchestrated strategies leading to the granting of hundreds of patents across the globe.
Matt applies his technical experience with electronics to assist clients in reaching desirable strategic outcomes. He is involved in managing large patent portfolios as well as prosecuting patent applications in a variety of technology areas, including numerous business method and software security patents. Matt works on prosecution matters at many stages, including initial application creation and filing, appeals, and reissue procedures. He furthers clients’ goals by preparing invalidity and noninfringement opinions, as well as in reviewing license agreements. Matt’s litigation practice includes drafting motions, writing briefs, and developing inter partes review (IPR) petitions.
Matt is a former extern with the USPTO, where he worked in diverse technology areas ranging from business methods to over-the-air signal processing. His time spent at the USPTO and at a university technology transfer office provides him with valuable insight, which he uses to enhance his practice.
Matt has been recognized on the Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll.
Notes editor, Journal of International Commercial Law, George Mason Law School, 2016-2018.
Author. “Be Careful What You Wish For: How International Tax Coordination Could Necessitate a U.S. Patent Box,” Journal of International Commercial Law, 2018.
Liberty Access Technologies Licensing LLC v. ASSA ABLOY AB et al.
2:22-cv-00507, E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap
2:22-cv-0318, E.D. Tex., Judge Gilstrap
1:23-cv-00756, N.D. Ill., Judge Kocoras
IPR2023-00815, -00816, -00817, PTAB
Prosecution First Blog
Statements Made When Prosecuting Narrower Parent Application Do Not Necessarily Limit a Child Patent Statements Made When Prosecuting Narrower Parent Application Do Not Necessarily Limit a Child Patent
June 23, 2023
Articles
Prosecute to Protect, Litigate Without Regret: How Smart Patent Prosecution Decisions Prepare Fintech for Future Litigation Prosecute to Protect, Litigate Without Regret: How Smart Patent Prosecution Decisions Prepare Fintech for Future Litigation
October 28, 2022
Federal Circuit IP Blog
Federal Circuit Upholds Exclusion of Damages Expert Testimony Federal Circuit Upholds Exclusion of Damages Expert Testimony
September 2, 2021
Federal Circuit IP Blog
Federal Circuit Says No to Incorporating Argument by Reference Federal Circuit Says No to Incorporating Argument by Reference
July 1, 2021
Articles
How Sports Tech Companies Can Fight Back Against Patent Trolls How Sports Tech Companies Can Fight Back Against Patent Trolls
July 27, 2018
SportTechieArticles
Copyright Takeaways from Loubie's 3D Printing Debacle Copyright Takeaways from Loubie's 3D Printing Debacle
June 9, 2016
3D Printing IndustryAward/Ranking
60 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2023 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 60 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2023 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll
May 15, 2024
Announcement
Finnegan Announces 2023 Mentors of the Year Finnegan Announces 2023 Mentors of the Year
December 29, 2023
Announcement
Finnegan Announces 2022 Mentors of the Year Finnegan Announces 2022 Mentors of the Year
December 30, 2022
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.