Taking appeals to a higher level. Appellate Litigation

Since our United States Supreme Court win in 1961, Wolf Greenfield’s appellate attorneys have continued to achieve precedent-setting success. The unique world of IP appellate litigation, which involves a complex mix of sophisticated technology and challenging procedural, legal, and factual issues, is a perfect fit for our technically experienced appellate attorneys.


Built to win.

IP appellate litigation requires the combination of technical understanding and legal experience that our attorneys have: whether they’ve clerked for an appellate court, worked in your industry, or have an advanced degree that allows them to understand complex processes, your Wolf Greenfield appellate team is built to win. 

90 %
Over 90% of our professionals have science or engineering degrees
84 %
84% of our attorneys have clerked for an appellate court or IP tribunal
72 %
72% our professionals have advanced degrees (MD, PhD, or MS)
3
We recently won three precedential Federal Circuit cases from post-grant matters in two months
WG_Appellate-1
Successful track record.

Our attorneys have argued and won at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the First Circuit, and in state appellate courts across the country. We have achieved appellate victories for world leading clients like Sony, E Ink, Bridgewater Candle Company, and Keurig Dr Pepper Inc.

Extensive experience.

Past appeals have arisen not only from district court cases, but also from the ITC, the PTAB, and from IPRs and other post-grant proceedings. This range of appellate experience enables us to identify potential appellate issues early on in the course of working with clients, allowing us to strategize right from the outset of a case as to how it might be argued on appeal.

Appellate backgrounds.

Many of our attorneys have served as law clerks or interns for federal and state appellate judges. This experience gives us inside knowledge of how appellate courts operate, and how to best strategize for  successful outcomes.

Technical depth.

More than 90% of our professionals have degrees in science or engineering and more than 70% have advanced degrees, adding value throughout all stages of appellate cases—from developing aggressive trial strategies, to choosing the optimal time and venue for litigation, to guiding appellate judges through the technical complexities at the core of a dispute.


We’ve played a role in precedent-setting appellate IP cases across the range of appellate tribunals, including:

  • US Supreme Court
  • US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • Federal appellate courts
  • State appellate courts across the US
  • Administrative appellate tribunals
  • Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) 
  • Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB)
WG_Appellate-2

Why clients select us for appellate litigation.

Their name recognition among thought leaders is pervasive. They’re respected.

Client
Chambers USA

The team is excellent at what it does and its lawyers are very knowledgeable and incredibly responsive.

Client
Chambers USA

I am very impressed with the quality of the work and the care with which it is done.

Client
Chambers USA

Appellate Litigation Experience

Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

We successfully represented Smith & Nephew in defending an appeal of an IPR that found Arthrex’s patents to be obvious. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s final written decision which largely tracked our petition. The Federal Circuit held that the Board did not err in finding that there was enough evidence to support an obviousness claim, and that the Board’s claim construction was correct.

Knowles Electronics LLC v. Cirrus Logic, Inc.

We successfully represented Cirrus Logic to obtain an affirmance of the PTAB’s ruling, which involved confirming the claim construction of a particular term and clarifying that the appropriate standard was used for evaluating written description.

Hologic, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc

We won an affirmance on appeal of the PTAB’s holding that Smith & Nephew’s prior PCT application disclosed to a person of ordinary skill in the art what the resulting patent claimed, instead of serving as prior art that would make the patent claims obvious. The patent was found to be valid and able to claim priority to the prior PCT application.

Uniloc USA, Inc and Uniloc Luxembourg S.A. v. Picis, Inc. et al.

We won an affirmance of a motion to dismiss for lack of patentable subject matter under § 101 of the Patent Act.

Research Frontiers Incorporated v. E Ink Corporation, et al.

The district court adopted our proposed claim constructions of key limitations in all of the patents, as a result of which plaintiff conceded it could not prevail and the court entered judgment of non-infringement in our client’s favor. The plaintiff appealed to the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the district court in a further victory for our client E Ink.

The Yankee Candle Company, Inc. c. The Bridgewater Candle Company, LLC

We successfully represented Bridgewater Candle in the district court case, which granted our client summary judgment on all copyright and trade dress infringement claims. While representing the client in the appeal, in which the First Circuit affirmed the district court judgment, we established some of the current standards in the First Circuit regarding copyright and trade dress law.

Teashot LLC v. Green Mountain Coffee Roasters

We successfully obtained an affirmance of a district court ruling that involved a favorable claim construction and grant of summary judgment of non-infringement for client Green Mountain.

LCD Display Devices Inv. No. 337-TA-741/749

We successfully represented respondent MStar Semiconductor in these investigations targeting MStar’s semiconductor chips, which were incorporated into numerous LCD products imported into the United States. We took the case through the hearing and secured a complete victory for MStar on the merits of non-infringement.

Contact