直 Japanese PDF Font
  • 구성원
  • 업무분야
  • 소식 및 자료
  • 사무소
  • Firm
  • 채용공고
Finnegan
    • AI + Finnegan
    • Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy
    • Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions
    • Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
    • Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
    • Prosecution and Portfolio Management
    • Trademark and Brand Management
    • AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
    • Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
    • Communications
    • Consumer Goods and Services
    • Energy
    • Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure
    • 생명과학
    • Transportation and Logistics
  • 업무사례

특허 소송 및 재판

About

Strong cases built on complete comprehension of the law and your business goals

When cases involve highly technical or science-based issues, it is essential that your legal team understand the subject matter of the dispute as well as the case law and procedural nuances specific to intellectual property law. Finnegan’s singular focus on IP gives clients a distinct advantage, because unlike other types of litigation, patent cases are often resolved before a trial ever begins. Claim construction, prior art searches, evaluations of a patent’s strengths and weaknesses, invalidity challenges, reexamination alternatives, building a damages strategy, identification of experts—these are just a few of the issues that can predetermine the outcome of a patent litigation.

We work with clients to help align litigation strategy with business goals, which might mean settling on reasonable terms as early as possible, or alternatively, sending a message to industry competitors through aggressive enforcement or defensive strategies. In our experience, a good settlement can often result in advantageous business solutions. As circumstances warrant, we assemble a skilled team from our deep bench to assist with crafting settlements before, during, and after trial so the litigation team can remain focused on the trial. Historically, some of our most significant achievements for clients have been attained through tactics that allowed them to meet their business and financial goals without the risks attendant to having a judge, jury, arbitration panel, administrative board, or appellate panel decide their future.

If your case goes to trial, the right team makes all the difference

When trial is the best or only option, Finnegan brings the right mix of technical expertise and trial and appellate experience. For 60 years, we have successfully litigated hundreds of cases involving the most technologically advanced and complex patents and argued the decisions on appeal by intentionally setting the trial record and fully preserving issues.

We have patent professionals who hold Ph.D.’s in fields ranging from neurobiology to electrical engineering, and more than a hundred hold master’s degrees. Before and during trial, our knowledge and intellectual firepower are applied to make the most intricate issues easily understood and to undercut the opposing side’s arguments. We build and present cases that are accurate, understandable, and persuasive.

Insight into every forum

We know the forums for IP disputes because we have successfully argued cases in the top IP venues for jurisdictions we serve, including in German regional civil courts, U.S. district courts, the UK Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, the UK High Court, the German Federal Patent Court (FPC), the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ), the UK Court of Appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court. We have also worked at these courts and agencies, and many of our professionals have backgrounds as judicial law clerks in trial and appellate courts. Across our eleven global offices, we diligently helped clients prepare for the June 2023 opening of the European Union’s Unified Patent Court (UPC), and we were among the first firms to file an action in the UPC.

Everyone in this practice

업무사례

In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Devices and Products Containing the Same

Achieved a comprehensive victory for respondent Innoscience, a global leader in gallium nitride (GaN) power devices, in a high-profile patent dispute before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC’s Final Determination confirms that Innoscience avoided all patent claims asserted by Infineon.

337‑TA‑1414, ITC, Judge Moore

WirelessWerx IP, LLC v. Audi of America, Inc.

Persuaded the court that asserted claims directed to an alleged form of geofencing technology were ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court found the patent invalid and dismissed the case against client Audi with prejudice in the first instance.

4:25-cv-11147, E.D. Mich., Judge Behm

Represented a global pharmaceutical company against a generic company on a patent covering an injectable painkilling medicine for short-term pain relief*

Represented a global pharmaceutical company against a generic company on a patent covering an injectable painkilling medicine for short-term pain relief.

Promptu Systems Corporation v. Comcast Corporation

Obtained a $240 million jury verdict for client Promptu in a patent infringement lawsuit against Comcast. The jury found that Comcast willfully infringed Promptu’s patents covering voice recognition technology for TV.

2:16-cv-06516, E.D. Pa., Judge Sanchez
22-1939, Fed. Cir., Judges Prost, Moore, Taranto

Advised a global healthcare company in anticipated court proceedings seeking declarations of non-infringement related to its influenza vaccines*

Advised a global healthcare company in anticipated court proceedings seeking declarations of non-infringement related to its influenza vaccines.

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

More

Insights

Lecture

Resolving Patent Suits Without Settlement Payments

September 3, 2026

Virtual

Webinar

PTAB Developments and Their Impact on Parallel Litigation: Strategic Considerations

August 26, 2026

Webinar

Conference

Singapore IP Week 2026

August 26-27, 2026

Conference

Georgia Life Sciences Summit 2026

August 25-26, 2026

Sandy Springs

Conference

Finnegan IP Summit 2026: Celebrating an Inclusive Talent Pipeline

August 11-13, 2026

Washington, DC

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: June 2026

July 28, 2026

More

Upcoming Events

Conference

IPBC Asia 2026

November 17-19, 2026

Tokyo

Conference

IAM Live: Navigating the UPC 2026

November 4, 2026

Paris

Conference

2026 EDTX Bench Bar Conference

October 28-30, 2026

Fort Worth

Seminar

Future IP UK

October 21, 2026

London

Hybrid Conference

Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – California

October 19-20, 2026

San Francisco

Seminar

PTAB Bar Association Thought Leader Summit 2026

October 7, 2026

Alexandria

More

뉴스

Award/Ranking

31 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized by Best Lawyers 2027

August 20, 2026

Commentary

BMW Counsel: How a Supplier Clause Prevented U.S. Trade Secret Litigation

August 3, 2026

Commentary

BMW Uses Forum-Selection Clause to Shut Down ITC Trade Secret Investigation

July 31, 2026

Commentary

A Win in Every Forum: Judge Terminates Zync's Case Against BMW

July 30, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Receives Tier 1 Rankings from Managing IP; More than 30 Attorneys Named 2026 IP Stars

July 30, 2026

Press Release

BMW Secures Landmark ITC Victory: ALJ Terminates Zync Investigation Based on Forum-Selection Clause

July 29, 2026

More

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • 개인정보처리방침
  • 면책공고
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP