直 Japanese PDF Font
  • 我们的专业人员
  • 服务
  • 我们的见解
  • 办公室
  • 事务所
  • 人才招聘
Finnegan
Lionel M. Lavenue
合伙人
More
vCard
  • 1875 Explorer Street
  • Suite 800
  • Reston, VA 20190-6023
+1 571 203 2750
lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com

Lionel M. Lavenue

合伙人

  • +1 571 203 2750 +1 571 203 2750
  • lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com
  • 1875 Explorer Street
  • Suite 800
  • Reston, VA 20190-6023
  • vCard

Lionel Lavenue律师具有丰富的专利诉讼经验,长期为以技术创新为核心的企业在重大、复杂的知识产权争议中提供专利维权与抗辩服务。他曾在220余起专利案件中担任首席或第一出庭律师,其中包括22起由法官或陪审团审理的庭审案件,并参与了近十起涉及商业秘密的诉讼案件。他因善于为遭遇NPE诉讼的创新型企业制定和实施多线并行的防御策略而广受认可,这些策略多次促成高价值专利主张被驳回,为客户避免了数百万美元的潜在损失。拉文先生在专利授权后程序方面拥有深厚经验,曾主导提交近200起双方复审(IPR)申请及多起单方复审程序。他在多个重要专利审理机构具有丰富实务经验,包括美国德克萨斯州东区联邦地区法院、美国国际贸易委员会(ITC)以及美国联邦索赔法院(COFC),并曾参与多起仲裁程序。他强大的庭审经验与其在专利布局及申请方面的深度实践相结合,使其能够将诉讼策略与客户长期的专利行权、许可及竞争战略目标有机衔接。

Lavenue律师曾在数十起马克曼听证会进行辩论。他曾指导多起复杂专利侵权案件和纠纷的证据开示,并且完成250多次的听证或者辩护。他还拥有向美国联邦巡回上诉法院提起专利/知识产权上讼的经验。

在专利申请和创新成果保护方面,Lavenue律师已撰写2500余件专利申请,并负责管理多个大型国内及国际专利组合。他的技术实践领域广泛,涵盖金融服务、电气电子、航空航天、汽车工业等多个行业。他亦与人工智能(AI)领域的领先创新主体密切合作,就与软件和计算机实施技术高度相关的AI发明(如机器学习算法、数据处理及自动化决策系统)提供专利申请、法律意见及诉讼方面的咨询服务。

Lavenue律师的业务范围还包括与商业方法、计算机、软件以及电气与机械装置(包括医疗器械,特别是医疗软件)相关的专利诉讼、申请及法律意见工作。他曾主导多起单方及双方专利复审程序,其中包括近100件用于诉讼防御目的的复审申请。作为最早一批运用IPR程序挑战专利有效性的律师之一,他在IPR及商业方法专利(CBM)程序方面积累了近200多件的丰富经验。

Lavenue律师在涉及政府合同的专利纠纷方面,包括美国法典28 U.S.C. § 1498下的专利侵权权利要求项具有特别的经验,他在处理美国联邦索赔法院的案件上也有着丰富的经验。他持有公众信托权限(Public Trust clearance);并曾持有最高机密和代码权限(Top Secret and Code Word clearances)。

Lavenue律师定期为律师协会和航空集团开展关于专利法问题的讲座——尤其是涉及飞机、旋翼机、滑翔、跳伞以及轻于空气的技术。他目前是一名飞机、直升机、滑翔机和气球飞行员,并针对知识产权问题为多家航空航天公司提供咨询服务。他在无人机和无人驾驶系统技术方面经验丰富。Lavenue律师还作为富布赖特学者(Fulbright Scholarship)参与了德国慕尼黑马克斯普朗克研究所(Max Planck Institute)的访问学者项目,专注于研究国外和国际专利、版权和竞争法。他不仅被《知识产权管理》(MIP)评为全美及弗吉尼亚州的“专利之星”,更因其在华盛顿特区地区的执业表现获得《知识产权资产管理》(IAM)的认可。

Lavenue律师和他的妻子还热衷于登山、跳伞和冒险活动。他们登顶了七大高峰(七大洲的最高峰)中的六座(1999年登顶非洲乞力马扎罗山、2002年登顶俄罗斯厄尔布鲁士山、2002年登顶南美洲阿空加瓜山、2004年登顶北美洲麦金利山、2004年登顶南极洲文森山以及2007年登顶大洋洲科修斯科山)。他们计划于2028/2029年攀登穆朗玛峰,完成登顶七大高峰。Lavenue律师持有多次大团队空中组成阵形跳伞纪录(1750多次编队跳伞)。他和他的妻子计划在2027/2028年进行第一次商业太空旅行。

Lavenue律师和各个科技领域的创新引领者一起工作,这些领域包括汽车、机器人及人工智能。Lionel在移动应用程序的前端和后端功能方面拥有丰富的经验,包括面向对象设计、HTML5 架构、Angular、Apache Kafka 和 MICRON 框架以及 BIAN 的应用。他在涉及飞机软件产品的专利事务中代表波音公司;在专利执行以及涉及各种电子和机械技术的多起专利侵权诉讼辩护中代表博世;在涉及电子、机械和通信技术的多起专利侵权诉讼中为各个LG公司及子公司进行辩护-主要是在德克萨斯州东区地方法院;在多起涉及电子、软件和机械技术的德克萨斯州东区地方法院、加利福尼亚北区地方法院和加利福尼亚中区地方法院专利侵权诉讼以及由日本商事仲裁协会(JCAA)裁决的仲裁事项中为索尼进行辩护。他还代表美国邮政服务局(USPS)和政府部门保护、维护和执行机械、电子和软件创新。

相关信息

  • 在美国联邦巡回上诉法院担任首席法官Glenn L. Archer, Jr.的法律助理,为期两年,此外还曾在美国联邦权利申诉法院担任法官Robert J. Yock的法律助理,为期两年。
  • 鹰童军银棕榈奖(Eagle Scout with Silver Palm)(上帝国家奖和箭之序)(God & Country Award and Order of the Arrow)

经验

Ericsson Inc. v. TCL Communication Technology
Finnegan was hired for this appeal after TCL received an unfavorable judgment of willful infringement, which resulted in a damages award of over $110 million. After Finnegan convinced the Federal Circuit that the claims were patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the court reversed the district court’s ruling of no invalidity, vacated the entire judgment against TCL, and awarded costs to TCL. Based on that award, Finnegan further persuaded the Eastern District of Texas to tax $2.35 million in costs.

18-2003, Fed. Cir., Judges Newman, Prost, Chen

Stragent, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC
Defended BMW against Stragent in a patent infringement case involving voice recognition technology that resulted in dismissal with prejudice after a favorable claim construction order.

6:11-cv-00278, E.D. Tex., Judges Davis, Love

Beacon Navigation, GmbH v. BMW of North America, LLC
Successfully obtained transfer of patent infringement lawsuit from D. Delaware to E.D. Michigan (and, later, a stay of litigation) on behalf of BMW in cases involving GPS tracking and interface technology.

1:11-cv-00930, -00931, D. Del., Judge Sleet
2:13-cv-11407, -11410, E.D. Mich., Judges Duggan, Roberts, Grand, Randon

Omega Patents, LLC v. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG and BMW of North America, LLC
Representing defendant BMW in a patent infringement action.

1:20-cv-01907, N.D. Ga., Judge Grimberg

HID Global Corporation v. Idemia Identity & Security USA
Represented petitioner HID Global Corp. in inter partes review of patents relating to laser-formed security features in identification cards.

IPR2017-01938, -01939, -01940, 01941, PTAB, Judges Margolies, Easthom, Zado

Protection for Toyota Aviation’s new technologies
Finnegan represented Toyota Aviation, which existed to develop new aircraft for Toyota. Finnegan prepared patent applications for a variety of innovative technologies, including automatic flight planning; displaying airspace information; fabricating a one-piece fuselage; forming a one-piece wing structure; forming filament wound closed-shape structures; primary flight displays; integrated vibration systems for filing and extracting media; chemical debonding agents for composite tooling; media removal devices; pre-filled media volumes for difficult to fill areas; cockpit pilot trays; aircraft circuit breaker assembly; sandwich stiffened composite structures; twin engine powered aircraft to turn single output shaft; and stall recovery systems.
PT Diagnostics v. The Boeing Company
Represented Boeing in patent matters relating to aircraft software products.

2:12-cv-00042, E.D. Tex., Judges Folsom, Gilstrap, Schneider, Craven

SD Holdings LLC v. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), Inc.
Finnegan successfully defended AOPA in the District of Oregon against the assertion of patents for computerized flight planning and web-based flight navigation. We obtained a swift dismissal of the entire case, avoiding lengthy litigation and licensing attempts by a notorious non-practicing entity (NPE).

3:13-cv-01296, D. Or., Judges Hernandez, Acosta

Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. v. O2 Micro International Ltd.
Worked with technical expert in preparation for trial following the victory in the concurrent ITC case (337-TA-666). Case was settled before trial and our client was awarded its attorneys' fees.

4:08-cv-04567, N.D. Cal., Judges Wilken, Laporte, Larson

Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp ("CCFL") Inverter Circuits
Successfully represented Monolithic Power Systems in a patent infringement investigation relating to power inverter technology. The Commission found no violation of Section 337 by respondents.

337-TA-666, ITC, Judge Gildea

Stragent, LLC v. BMW et al.

After forcing Stragent to willfully concede in open court that it could not present enough evidence to prove infringement of its asserted patents, which Stragent read on the automotive communications standard AUTOSAR, Finnegan vigorously negotiated for BMW a royalty-free license to Stragent’s entire patent portfolio. Successfully invalidated multiple Stragent patents before the Patent Office, with one victory on appeal and additional IPR petitions pending at the time of case resolution.

1:20-cv-00510, D. Del., Judge Wolson
1:23-cv-00005, D. Del., Judge Wolson
IPR2023-00333, -00334, PTAB
22-2062 , Fed. Cir.
IPR2021-00417, -00418, -00419, PTAB, Judges Galligan, Repko, White

Ericsson Inc. v. TCL Communication Technology

TCL hired Finnegan to handle the appeal of an unfavorable judgment of willful infringement at the Eastern District of Texas, which resulted in a massive damages award of over $110 million. After Finnegan tenaciously convinced the Federal Circuit that the claims were patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the court reversed the district court’s ruling of no invalidity, vacated the entire judgment against TCL, and awarded costs to TCL. Based on that award, Finnegan further persuaded the trial court to tax $2.35 million in costs.

18-2003, Fed. Cir., Judges Newman, Prost, Chen

Stragent, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC

Aggressively defended BMW against Stragent in a patent infringement case involving voice recognition technology that resulted in complete dismissal with prejudice following a favorable claim construction order.

6:11-cv-00278, E.D. Tex., Judges Davis, Love

Beacon Navigation, GmbH v. BMW of North America, LLC

Wholly obtained transfer of patent infringement lawsuit from D. Delaware to E.D. Michigan (and, later, a stay of litigation) on behalf of BMW in cases involving GPS tracking and interface technology.

1:11-cv-00930, -00931, D. Del., Judge Sleet
2:13-cv-11407, -11410, E.D. Mich., Judges Duggan, Roberts, Grand, Randon

Carrum Technologies, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC, et al.

Successfully obtained complete and total victory against Carrum on appeal of the District of Delaware’s claim construction to the Federal Circuit following Carrum’s stipulation of non-infringement under the claim construction, thereby exonerating BMW’s ACC system, first sold in 2000, against Carrum’s 2004 patents. Strategically invalidated several asserted claims through post-grant efforts before the U.S. Patent Office, including IPRs and EPRs, and pursued claims through proceedings before the Eastern District of Virginia to vindicate BMW’s patent challenges.

1:18-cv-01645, D. Del., Judge Andrews
21-1435, 24-1480, Fed. Cir., Judges Clevenger, Cunningham, Lourie, Moore, Prost, Taranto
IPR2019-00902, -00903, -00904, -00905, -00927, 00928, PTAB, Judges Browne, Scanlon, Tornquist
90/019,010, CRU

Patent drafting and prosecution for CentralSquare’s AI technologies

Finnegan is honored and tremendously proud to partner with CentralSquare in developing and protecting its mission-critical software and technology solutions for public sector agencies, including those serving public safety and public administration. Our dynamic team has led the drafting and prosecution of a broad portfolio of artificial intelligence (AI)-related patent applications, advancing CentralSquare’s innovations across emergency services and municipal operations. These AI technologies accelerate emergency response, streamline workflows, and strengthen data-driven decision-making for agencies and the communities they serve.

Working diligently and closely with CentralSquare’s inventors and in-house counsel, we ensure every application captures the technical depth of the invention while aligning with CentralSquare’s strategic goals. We fully prioritize clarity, enforceability, and foresight—refining claims, anticipating examiner challenges, and crafting robust Office Action responses. By anticipating industry trends in AI and preparing forward-looking applications, Finnegan thoroughly positions CentralSquare’s innovations not only to be protected, but also to drive lasting impact in public safety and beyond.

More

专业见解

IP Updates

EPR Academy: ALERT – USPTO Introduces New EPR Pre-order Procedure for Determination in Ex Parte Reexaminations EPR Academy: ALERT – USPTO Introduces New EPR Pre-order Procedure for Determination in Ex Parte Reexaminations

April 3, 2026

Articles

Preempting Surprise Injunctions in Germany and the UPC: Strategic Use of the Schutzschrift in Global Patent Litigation

Preempting Surprise Injunctions in Germany and the UPC: Strategic Use of the Schutzschrift in Global Patent Litigation  Preempting Surprise Injunctions in Germany and the UPC: Strategic Use of the Schutzschrift in Global Patent Litigation 

March 27, 2026

Articles

Patent Ruling Shows Quiet Power of State-Law Bad-Faith Statutes

Patent Ruling Shows Quiet Power of State-Law Bad-Faith Statutes Patent Ruling Shows Quiet Power of State-Law Bad-Faith Statutes

February 20, 2026

Bloomberg Law

Articles

EPR Academy, Part 3 of 6: The EPR Appeals Process

EPR Academy, Part 3 of 6: The EPR Appeals Process EPR Academy, Part 3 of 6: The EPR Appeals Process

February 19, 2026

Articles

Global Patent Litigation: Strategic Insights Across U.S., Germany, and China

Global Patent Litigation: Strategic Insights Across U.S., Germany, and China Global Patent Litigation: Strategic Insights Across U.S., Germany, and China

December 18, 2025

Articles

EPR Academy, Part 2 of 6: The EPR Process – From Request to Reexamination Certificate

EPR Academy, Part 2 of 6: The EPR Process – From Request to Reexamination Certificate EPR Academy, Part 2 of 6: The EPR Process – From Request to Reexamination Certificate

December 5, 2025

More

职业奖项

"Lionel Lavenue is a terrific patent litigator. He earnestly provides thoughtful advice and always puts his clients’ needs first. I have never been wanting for a response or document when working with Lionel. I very much appreciate his candour and creative solutions to problems. Lionel is truly one of a kind."

Intellectual Asset Management Patent 1000

“Lionel is always focused on winning a case. He manages the most complex litigation easily and is excellent at working under pressure. Lionel’s presence is comforting for the client and frightening for the adversary. In short, he enjoys fighting and winning.”

Intellectual Asset Management Patent 1000

"Lionel Lavenue is an extremely smart and experienced lead partner. A great patent attorney with impressive technical competences. Our outside impression is that he leads his case teams extremely well, and his staff enjoy working with him. We certainly do."

The Legal 500 U.S.

“James Barney, Lionel Lavenue and Doris Johnson Hines have all engaged in Section 337 investigations recently and are three of the best all-round patent litigators on deck.”

Intellectual Asset Management Patent 1000

"Lionel Lavenue is a terrific patent litigator. He earnestly provides thoughtful advice and always puts his clients’ needs first. I have never been wanting for a response or document when working with Lionel. I very much appreciate his candour and creative solutions to problems. Lionel is truly one of a kind."

Intellectual Asset Management Patent 1000

“Lionel is always focused on winning a case. He manages the most complex litigation easily and is excellent at working under pressure. Lionel’s presence is comforting for the client and frightening for the adversary. In short, he enjoys fighting and winning.”

Intellectual Asset Management Patent 1000

"Lionel Lavenue is an extremely smart and experienced lead partner. A great patent attorney with impressive technical competences. Our outside impression is that he leads his case teams extremely well, and his staff enjoy working with him. We certainly do."

The Legal 500 U.S.

“James Barney, Lionel Lavenue and Doris Johnson Hines have all engaged in Section 337 investigations recently and are three of the best all-round patent litigators on deck.”

Intellectual Asset Management Patent 1000

新闻

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Earns Top Rankings in 2026 IAM Patent 1000 Guide; Nearly 60 Attorneys Ranked Finnegan Earns Top Rankings in 2026 IAM Patent 1000 Guide; Nearly 60 Attorneys Ranked

May 28, 2026

Intellectual Asset Management (IAM)

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Decisive ITC Victory for Innoscience in Final Determination Finnegan Secures Decisive ITC Victory for Innoscience in Final Determination

May 11, 2026

Commentary

ITC Bars Import of Innoscience Chips Made Before Redesign ITC Bars Import of Innoscience Chips Made Before Redesign

May 8, 2026

Law360

Press Release

Pvtech Secures Stay of New Jersey District Court Litigation Following USPTO Institution of All 10 Ex Parte Reexamination Requests Against Patents Asserted by Jiaxing Super Lighting Pvtech Secures Stay of New Jersey District Court Litigation Following USPTO Institution of All 10 Ex Parte Reexamination Requests Against Patents Asserted by Jiaxing Super Lighting

April 28, 2026

Press Release

Pvtech Achieves Perfect Record at USPTO: Institution of All 10 of 10 Ex Parte Reexamination Petitions Against Patents Asserted by Jiaxing Super Lighting Pvtech Achieves Perfect Record at USPTO: Institution of All 10 of 10 Ex Parte Reexamination Petitions Against Patents Asserted by Jiaxing Super Lighting

April 24, 2026

Press Release

BMW AG Announces Resolution of WDTX Declaratory Judgment against Onesta, Following Broad Covenant Not to Sue to BMW AG by Onesta BMW AG Announces Resolution of WDTX Declaratory Judgment against Onesta, Following Broad Covenant Not to Sue to BMW AG by Onesta

April 23, 2026

More

会员身份

  • 美国联邦索赔法院咨询委员会(Advisory Council of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims)(2006年至今)
  • 美国联邦巡回上诉法院律师协会(U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Bar Association)
  • 美国联邦索赔法院律师协会(U.S. Court of Federal Claims Bar Association)
  • 美国律师协会(知识产权分部;航空航天法论坛)((American Bar Association) (IP Section; Forum on Air & Space Law))
  • 律师-飞行员律师协会(Lawyer-Pilots Bar Association)
  • 美国知识产权法协会(American Intellectual Property Law Association)
  • 飞机拥有者与飞行员协会(AOPA)
  • 美国跳伞协会(United States Parachute Association)
  • 跳伞协会(Parachutists Over Phorty [Skydiving] Society)
  • 美国摩托车协会(American Motorcyclist Association)
  • 美国国家航空协会(National Aeronautic Association)
  • 弗吉尼亚州养蜂人协会(Virginia State Beekeepers Association)
  • 弗吉尼亚直升机协会(Virginia Helicopter Association)
  • 美国国家公务航空协会(National Business Aviation Association)
Admissions and Education

律师协会

  • 哥伦比亚特区律师协会
  • 佛罗里达州律师协会
  • 北卡罗来纳州律师协会
  • 维吉尼亚州律师协会
  • 美国康涅狄格州地方法院律师协会
  • 美国佛罗里达州南区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国伊利诺斯州北区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国密歇根州东区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国北卡罗来纳州西区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国宾夕法尼亚州西区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国德克萨斯州东区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国德克萨斯州北区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国德克萨斯州东区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国德克萨斯州南区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国德克萨斯州西区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国维吉尼亚州东区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国维吉尼亚州西区地方法院律师协会
  • 美国联邦巡回上诉法院律师协会
  • 美国联邦索赔法院律师协会
  • 美国最高法院
  • 美国专利商标局律师协会

教育背景

  • 乔治华盛顿大学国家法律中心,法学硕士,专利法与政府采购法,1994年
  • 美国大学华盛顿法学院,法学博士,1992年
  • 乔治梅森大学,信息系统,理学硕士,1997年
  • 范德堡大学,文学士,优等成绩,1988年

Clerkships

司法助理职务:

  • 美国联邦巡回上诉法院
  • 美国联邦权利申诉法院

语言

  • 英语
  • 德语

Lionel律师的业务领域

AI + Finnegan
AI + Patent
全球知识产权维权、诉讼与审判
联邦巡回法院和最高法院上诉
美国国际贸易委员会337调查与审判
专利诉讼与审判
审前策略
专利局无效程序
PTAB无效程序:双方复审及授权后复审
知识产权申办及组合管理
尽职调查
知识产权组合管理
许可、专利池、及其它交易
意见及咨询

Lionel律师的行业领域

电子和信息科技
人工智能(AI)和机器学习(ML)
电子与计算机技术
机器人技术
化学、工业和材料
3D 打印和增材制造
工业制造
通信
金融服务及商业系统
消费品和服务业
消费品
能源
石油和天然气
运输和物流
航空、航天及无人驾驶航空系统(UAS)
汽车

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

  • 隐私
  • 免责申明
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

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