直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
Timothy P. McAnulty
Partner
More
vCard
  • 901 New York Avenue, NW
  • Washington, DC 20001-4413
+1 202 408 4348
timothy.mcanulty@finnegan.com timothy.mcanulty@finnegan.com

Timothy P. McAnulty

Partner

  • +1 202 408 4348 +1 202 408 4348
  • timothy.mcanulty@finnegan.com timothy.mcanulty@finnegan.com
  • 901 New York Avenue, NW
  • Washington, DC 20001-4413
  • vCard
Timothy (Tim) McAnulty practices all aspects of patent law, including district court litigations, post-grant proceedings, due diligence, strategic counseling, and portfolio development. He represents clients across a wide range of technologies and works closely with them to develop strategies aligned with their business goals. 

Tim focuses on contentious patent proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), including proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), reexaminations, and interferences. Tim has represented petitioners and patent owners in dozens of proceedings, from petition through hearing and appeal. Throughout each proceeding, Tim draws on both his prosecution and litigation experience to develop comprehensive strategies. Tim is a first-chair practitioner and seamlessly coordinates Patent Office strategies for inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review (PGR) with parallel litigation, as well as strategies for parallel reexamination and reissue of challenged patents.

Throughout his career, Tim has conducted numerous due diligence investigations and freedom-to-operate studies, working with both acquiring companies and target companies through investment rounds, acquisition, and initial public offerings (IPOs). He has helped many clients develop comprehensive patent portfolios with strategies toward enforcement, competitive landscaping, licensing, and protecting commercial embodiments.

Tim represents clients across various technologies and co-leads the firm's manufacturing industry group. He has significant experience with medical device technologies, including orthopedic implants, gastrointestinal stents, vascular stents, heart valve repair/replacement devices, and nerve stimulation/modulation, as well as embolics and other injectable materials. He has specific expertise with drug/biologic-device combination products (pre-filled syringes, autoinjectors, and nasal delivery devices), including strategies for building portfolios, FDA patent listing, licensing, and litigation. Tim represents device manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies in various matters, including cases under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA).

Tim's experience across other technologies includes materials, especially polymers, hydraulics, business methods, signal processing, and fabricated parts. These technologies span various industries, including chemical processing, industrial manufacturing, heavy equipment, electronic brokerages, electronic gaming/wagering, and consumer goods.

Before joining Finnegan, Tim worked for several years as a patent examiner at the USPTO. His art unit handled mechanical technologies related to automotive, robotic, bicycle, and machine component technologies. Tim also previously worked as a mechanical engineer, including positions in the oil and gas industry, supporting refinery business units by designing and retrofitting complex reactor internals for supporting, transferring, and fluidizing catalysts.

Experience

Aqua Products. Inc. v. Matal

Represented patent owner Aqua Products/Fluidra in appeal involving robotic pool cleaners; successfully petitioned Federal Circuit for en banc review of statutory burden of proof for motions to amend before the PTAB; en banc court revised the legal standard and vacated adverse PTAB decision against Fluidra.

15-1177, Fed. Cir., Judges Chen, Dyk, Hughes, Lourie, Moore, Newman, O'Malley, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Wallach

Smith & Nephew v. ConforMIS, Inc.

Represented patent owner Conformis in sixteen IPRs challenging nine patents that were asserted in parallel district court litigation involving orthopedic implant devices and surgical tools. The cases were successfully settled.

IPR2016-01874; IPR2017-00115, -00307, -00372, -00373, -00487, -00488, -00510, -00511, -00544, -00545, -00778, -00779, -00780, -00983, -00984, PTAB, Judges Bunting, Scanlon, Weiker, Worth

Universal Electronics, Inc. v. Caavo Inc.

Represented patent owner Caavo as the junior party in two interferences related to audio-video switching devices. The PTAB granted judgement in favor of Caavo.

106,113; 106,114, PTAB, Judges Lane, Moore, Katz

William Hill U.S. Holdco, Inc. v. CG Technology Development, LLC

Represented patent owner CG Technology in IPR challenges related to computer gaming/wagering systems. The cases were successfully settled.

IPR2019-00317, -00319, -00320, PTAB, Judges Weatherly, Hoskins, Majors

Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. v. 5th Market Inc.

Represented petitioner CME challenging patents that were asserted in parallel district court litigation involving electronic brokerage exchanges. The cases were successfully resolved.

CBM2013-00027; CBM2014-00114; CBM2015-00061, PTAB, Judges Chang, Braden, Deshpande, Lee, Zecher
USPTO Control No. 95/002,032, PTAB, Judge Carlson

Boston Scientific Corp. et al. v. Cook, Inc. et al.

Represented patent owner asserting 10 patents related to gastrointestinal stents. The case was successfully settled.

1:10-cv-11646, D. Mass., Judge Woodlock

More

Insights

At the PTAB Blog

USPTO’s “Frequently Asked Questions” Provides Guidance on the New “Workload Management” Bifurcated Discretionary Denial Procedure USPTO’s “Frequently Asked Questions” Provides Guidance on the New “Workload Management” Bifurcated Discretionary Denial Procedure

April 30, 2025

At the PTAB Blog

USPTO’s Boardside Chat Provides Guidance on the New “Workload Management” Bifurcated Discretionary Denial Procedure USPTO’s Boardside Chat Provides Guidance on the New “Workload Management” Bifurcated Discretionary Denial Procedure

April 25, 2025

Articles

Petitioners and Patent Owners Face Estoppel After a PTAB Final Written Decision

Petitioners and Patent Owners Face Estoppel After a PTAB Final Written Decision Petitioners and Patent Owners Face Estoppel After a PTAB Final Written Decision

December 13, 2024

Westlaw Today

Articles

Trending at the PTAB: Collateral Estoppel Continues Evolving

Trending at the PTAB: Collateral Estoppel Continues Evolving Trending at the PTAB: Collateral Estoppel Continues Evolving

December 5, 2024

Law360

Conference

The ILS Global Forum on International Law 2024 The ILS Global Forum on International Law 2024

February 16, 2024

Miami

At the PTAB Blog

Finnegan Attorneys Author the Third Edition of The Practitioner’s Guide to Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Finnegan Attorneys Author the Third Edition of The Practitioner’s Guide to Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

November 28, 2022

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

Commentary

OpenSky ‘Abuse’ Sanctions Add New Weapons in Patent Challenges OpenSky ‘Abuse’ Sanctions Add New Weapons in Patent Challenges

October 6, 2022

Bloomberg Law

Commentary

Two Director Review Rulings Give PTAB Petitioners a New Edge Two Director Review Rulings Give PTAB Petitioners a New Edge

September 2, 2022

Managing Intellectual Property

Media Mention

DC Intellectual Property Litigation Department of the Year: Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP DC Intellectual Property Litigation Department of the Year: Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

May 28, 2018

The National Law Journal

Media Mention

Fed. Circ. Makes It Easier to Amend Patents in AIA Reviews Fed. Circ. Makes It Easier to Amend Patents in AIA Reviews

October 4, 2017

Law360

Press Release

Second Edition of PTAB Trials Guidebook by Finnegan Attorneys Now Available Second Edition of PTAB Trials Guidebook by Finnegan Attorneys Now Available

November 3, 2016

More

Professional Activities

  • American Bar Association
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
Admissions and Education

Admissions

  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
  • District of Columbia
  • Massachusetts
  • U.S. District Court, D. Massachusetts
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Veterans Claims

Education

George Washington University Law School
J.D., with honors, 2007
Lehigh University
B.S., Mechanical Engineering, 1997

Timothy's Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy
Appeals from the PTAB
Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals
Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals
Patent Litigation and Trials
Pretrial Strategies
Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
Derivations
Ex Parte Reexamination (EPR)
Interferences
PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR
Prosecution and Portfolio Management
Due Diligence
Ex Parte Reexamination (EPR)
Freedom to Operate Opinions
IP Portfolio Management
Opinions and Counseling
Patent Drafting and Prosecution
Patent Mining and Mapping
Patent Reissues

Timothy's Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
Robotics
Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
Manufacturing
Communications
Financial Services and Business Systems
Consumer Goods and Services
Consumer Products
Energy
Clean Energy and Renewables
Life Sciences
Medical Device and Diagnostics
Transportation and Logistics
Automotive and Smart Mobility Tech

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