直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
Jeffrey C. Totten
Partner
More
vCard
  • 901 New York Avenue, NW
  • Washington, DC 20001-4413
+1 202 408 4232
jeffrey.totten@finnegan.com jeffrey.totten@finnegan.com

Jeffrey C. Totten

Partner

  • +1 202 408 4232 +1 202 408 4232
  • jeffrey.totten@finnegan.com jeffrey.totten@finnegan.com
  • 901 New York Avenue, NW
  • Washington, DC 20001-4413
  • vCard

Jeff Totten focuses on trial-level patent and trade secret litigation, post-grant validity challenges, and strategic client counseling in the mechanical and electrical fields. He enjoys helping clients achieve their business goals in court, at the Patent Office, and across the negotiating table.

Jeff represents clients in patent and trade secret matters in U.S. district courts and before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), including stand-up roles in bench and jury trials. In addition to trial work, Jeff has extensive experience managing litigation teams involved in complex intellectual property disputes; developing, briefing, and arguing claim construction and summary judgment positions; selecting and working with technical experts; and taking discovery in the United States and abroad. He also assists clients with appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Jeff has represented patent owners and petitioners in dozens of post-grant validity challenges before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). His work includes presenting oral arguments, preparing petitions and patent owner replies, taking PTAB discovery, and coordinating PTAB proceedings with ongoing district court litigation. Jeff has also helped clients prepare for potential derivation proceedings at the PTAB.

Jeff provides clients with strategic counsel, pre-litigation assessments, and opinions of counsel. He writes opinions regarding patent infringement and validity. He counsels clients regarding patent inventorship and ownership, derivation, and trade secrets. He also assists clients with patent prosecution, portfolio management, and strategic planning.

Jeff serves as a leader of Finnegan's manufacturing industry working group. He presents seminars and webinars on IP issues facing manufacturing companies and has advised multiple manufacturing companies on the impact wide-spread adoption of additive manufacturing and 3D printing will have on their IP portfolios.

In his pro bono practice, Jeff has represented criminal defendants in misdemeanor and felony cases before the D.C. Superior Court.

Experience

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

Certain Variable Speed Wind Turbine Generators and Components Thereof

Represented wind turbine manufacturer Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy in defense of its wind turbine generators against claims of infringement involving two patents. Developed invalidity and inequitable conduct positions, led team taking related discovery from Complainant, worked with technical experts, and examined and prepared witnesses at oral hearing. Commission decision enabled client to continue its operations in U.S. market notwithstanding technical violation by obsoleted controls.

337-TA-1218, ITC, Judge Cheney

General Electric Co. v. United Technologies Corp.

Represented patent owner in a series of inter partes review challenges and related appeals to pioneering technology on next-generation aircraft engines. Successfully secured non-institution of several proceedings and claims, and in several cases that proceeded to final written decision, persuaded the Board to confirm some or all of the challenged claims.

IPR2016-00524, -00527, -00531, -00533, -00855, -00857, -00952, -01286, -01304, IPR2017-00428, -00431, -00999, -01123, -01489, PTAB, Judges Renya, Taranto, Hughes, Jung, Rice, Wood, Daniels, Abraham, Crumbley, Tornquist, Weatherly, Hoskins, Lee, Homere, Bisk, Snedden, Yang, Pollock

Cambria Company LLC v. Cosentino SA

Successfully defended against a motion for preliminary injunction that would have excluded the accused synthetic slab products out of the U.S. market. Filed concurrent inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant reviews (PGRs) challenging the asserted patents, leading to a settlement that leaves the U.S. market open to Cosentino’s industry-leading Silestone products.

6:20-cv-00894, -00895, -00896, -00897, W.D. Tex., Judge Albright
6:20-cv-01080, W.D. Tex., Judge Albright
IPR2021-00214, -00215, -00216; PGR2021-00010, -00090, PTAB, Judges Kalan, Ross, Kaiser

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP v. Xcential Corp. et al.

As lead counsel in derivation proceeding, analyzed inventorship dispute, and prepared derivation petition regarding unauthorized filing of patent application by potential vendor. Counseled client on derivation petitions and procedures, as well as interplay with contract and trade secret claims.

DER2022-00004, PTAB, Judges Arbes, Lee, Kennedy

Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corp. v. POSCO

Represented POSCO, a Korean steel manufacturer, in a district court patent infringement, Lanham Act, and unfair competition action against a Japanese competitor in the area of grain oriented electrical steel.

2:12-cv-02429, D.N.J., Judges Cavanaugh, Chesler, Falk, Waldor
15-0112, Fed. Cir., Judges Dyk, Hughes, Newman

More

Insights

Conference

IPOwners Spring Summit 2026 IPOwners Spring Summit 2026

March 18-19,2026

Washington

Podcasts

Inventorship & the AIA: The Federal Circuit’s First Derivation Decision - Part 2

Inventorship & the AIA: The Federal Circuit’s First Derivation Decision - Part 2 Inventorship & the AIA: The Federal Circuit’s First Derivation Decision - Part 2

October 13, 2025

Download

Podcasts

Inventorship & the AIA: The Federal Circuit’s First Derivation Decision - Part 1

Inventorship & the AIA: The Federal Circuit’s First Derivation Decision - Part 1 Inventorship & the AIA: The Federal Circuit’s First Derivation Decision - Part 1

October 8, 2025

Download

Webinar

Relying on the POSITA in Patent Prosecution: Impact of General Knowledge on Patentability/Validity Relying on the POSITA in Patent Prosecution: Impact of General Knowledge on Patentability/Validity

May 23, 2023

Webinar

Conference

Auto IP USA 2023 Auto IP USA 2023

May 4, 2023

Detroit

Podcasts

Director Review of Code200 v. Bright Data

Director Review of Code200 v. Bright Data Director Review of Code200 v. Bright Data

November 17, 2022

Download
More

News

Commentary

Finnegan Team Secures $240M Jury Verdict After PTAB Success Finnegan Team Secures $240M Jury Verdict After PTAB Success

February 3, 2026

Managing Intellectual Property

Commentary

How We Won: Promptu Counsel on Its $240M Victory Against Comcast How We Won: Promptu Counsel on Its $240M Victory Against Comcast

February 2, 2026

World Intellectual Property Review

Media Mention

Law360's Legal Lions of The Week - Promptu Law360's Legal Lions of The Week - Promptu

January 30, 2026

Law360

Media Mention

Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs: Promptu Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs: Promptu

January 30, 2026

The AmLaw Litigation Daily

Media Mention

Comcast Hit With $240M Verdict in Voice Recognition IP Trial Comcast Hit With $240M Verdict in Voice Recognition IP Trial

January 27, 2026

Law360

Press Release

Finnegan Secures $240 Million Jury Verdict for Promptu in Patent Case Against Comcast Finnegan Secures $240 Million Jury Verdict for Promptu in Patent Case Against Comcast

January 26, 2026

More

Professional Activities

  • Intellectual Property Owners Association
    (vice chair, U.S. Post-Grant Patent Office Practice Committee, 2020-present; Litigation Committee, 2013-2019)
  • American Bar Association
  • American Intellectual Property Association
  • ITC Trial Lawyers Association
Admissions and Education

Admissions

  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
  • District of Columbia
  • Virginia
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

Education

University of Michigan Law School
J.D., cum laude, 2003
University of Virginia
B.S., Mechanical Engineering, high distinction, 2000

Jeffrey's Practices

Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions
Due Diligence
Opinions and Counseling
Patent Mining and Mapping
Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
ITC Section 337 Investigations and Trials
Patent Litigation and Trials
Pretrial Strategies
Trade Secrets
Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
Derivations
PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR
Prosecution and Portfolio Management
IP Portfolio Management
Patent Drafting and Prosecution
Trade Secrets

Jeffrey's Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
Electrical and Computer Technology
Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
Additive Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Communications
Financial Services and Business Systems
Energy
Clean Energy and Renewables
Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure
Gaming
Life Sciences
Medical Device and Diagnostics
Transportation and Logistics
Aerospace, Aviation, and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
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