Associate
Gordon Wright focuses on trademark and false advertising litigation proceedings in U.S. district courts and before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). He represents brands across a range of industries, including travel and tourism, cigars, construction equipment, as well as other consumer goods and services.
Gordon has experience with pre-litigation due diligence, discovery, depositions and motion practice, as well as with managing opposition and cancellation proceedings before the TTAB. His trademark prosecution and counseling practice includes advising clients as to the selection, maintenance, registration, enforcement, and portfolio management of trademarks in the United States and abroad. Leveraging his technical background and prior experience as a manufacturing engineer for a global security and aerospace company, Gordon also litigates and prosecutes patents related to software, wireless communications, image capture, consumer electronics, and exercise equipment.
While in law school, Gordon completed an externship with the University of Georgia (UGA) Office of Research, where he provided patentability assessments on faculty research and drafted invention summaries used to market university technology to potential licensees. He participated in the UGA Public Interest Practicum, assisting faculty in providing legal advice to underprivileged members of the Athens-Clarke County community. Gordon continues to give back to his community through his pro bono work at Finnegan, which includes representing individuals in records restriction, compassionate release, and veteran benefit denial appeals.
accessiBe Ltd. v. AudioEye, Inc.
Finnegan represented accessiBe Ltd. in a high-stakes patent dispute against AudioEye, Inc., centered on web accessibility technologies. With AudioEye already asserting 15 patents across two pending lawsuits, accessiBe turned to Finnegan for a strategic counteroffensive.
Finnegan conducted a comprehensive market analysis, identified patents infringed by AudioEye, and acquired them on accessiBe’s behalf. Armed with this new IP arsenal, Finnegan filed a third lawsuit—this time putting accessiBe on the offensive in a jurisdiction known for faster trial timelines. This maneuver leapfrogged AudioEye’s earlier suits, placing accessiBe’s case at the front of the litigation queue.
Just weeks later, AudioEye came to the negotiating table. All three suits were resolved favorably for accessiBe, marking a decisive win driven by Finnegan’s proactive and tactical approach.
1:22-cv-00792, D. Del., Judge Connolly
Successfully represented Bausch & Lomb and Eye Therapies in a Hatch-Waxman patent infringement litigation and parallel PTAB challenges concerning an ANDA for generic versions of over-the-counter Lumify® ocular drops. The cases settled favorably for our clients.
3:21-cv-16766, D.N.J., Judges Kirsch, Singh
IPR2022-00146, PTAB, Judges Hulse, New, Pollock
IPR2024-00467, PTAB, Judges Flax, Pollock, Yang
IPR2022-00142, PTAB, Judges Flax, Hulse, New, Pollock
Articles
'Dewberry' Case May Raise Costs and Liability for US Corporates 'Dewberry' Case May Raise Costs and Liability for US Corporates
July 3, 2024
World Intellectual Property ReviewINCONTESTABLE® Blog
Parody Sneaker Afforded No First Amendment Protection Against Vans’ Trademark Infringement Claims Parody Sneaker Afforded No First Amendment Protection Against Vans’ Trademark Infringement Claims
February 1, 2024
INCONTESTABLE® Blog
Vans Skates Past Summary Judgment Challenge to the Validity of Its Shoe Trade Dress Vans Skates Past Summary Judgment Challenge to the Validity of Its Shoe Trade Dress
November 15, 2023
At the PTAB Blog
How to Get “Boxed-In” and Blow a Judgment You Received: Sleeping in the Bed You Made How to Get “Boxed-In” and Blow a Judgment You Received: Sleeping in the Bed You Made
June 1, 2021
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.