Top best Patent Lawyers in Chicago | 455 available

We help inventors, patent owners, and other businesses protect and exploit their Intellectual Property in a variety of ways, including obtaining federal rights, contacting businesses seeking to use (or already using) your Intellectual Property, and taking enforcement steps where necessary.We also keep the playing field free for good ideas, by defending attacks against your business lines.. I am a partner at Flachsbart and Greenspoon helping clients with their trademark, patent, advertising, copyright and internet legal needs.

Since graduating from De Paul University College of Law in 1997, Michael T. Mertz has practiced with Hurley McKenna & Mertz, P.C.. In 2004, he became a partner. Mr. Mertz exclusively represents injured persons and their families in all types of cases, including medical malpractice, nursing home abuse, product liability, construction accidents, automobile collisions, and premises liability cases.. Throughout his tenure he has served his clients well, achieving significant verdicts and obtaining record-setting settlements. To date, Mr. Mertz has recovered more than $150 Million for his clients. Mr. Mertz has successfully resolved cases in Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Tennessee, Nevada, Indiana and Oklahoma.. Through his extensive experience in complex cases, Mr. Mertz has honed his skills to evaluate each case closely and quickly identify successful theories and arguments. His tireless and aggressive advocacy, coupled with his flexibility throughout each phase of litigation, allows Mr. Mertz to achieve maximum recoveries on behalf of his clients.. Mr. Mertz also serves as his clients' appellate lawyer. In 1999, in Modelski v. Navistar Int'l Transp. Corp., 302 879, 707 N.E.2d 239 (1st Dist. 1999), Mr. Mertz argued before the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, and won a reversal of a jury's verdict entered against his client. The case settled shortly after Mr. Mertz convinced the Appellate Court to rule in his client's favor.. In 2001, in Keef v. Widuch, et al., 321 571, 747 N.E.2d 992 (1st Dist. 2001), Mr. Mertz again successfully appealed the dismissal the complaint in one of his cases by convincing the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, to reverse the lower court's ruling.

Sailesh K. Patel is a partner at Schiff Hardin LLP, a national general practice firm with over 400 attorneys with offices across the country.

With a background in chemical engineering, Mr. Patel specializes in IP litigation and prosecution with an emphasis in pharmaceutical patent litigation. Mr. Patel has worked with a variety of technologies ranging from chemical processes and compositions to software and business methods.

Registered U.S. patent attorney who guides entrepreneurs and small business owners through the process for legal protection of their innovative products.  Trusted advisor for universities and corporations for preparation and prosecution of patent application for chemical inventions including specialty chemicals, water treatment chemicals, veterinary pharmaceutical products, animal feeds and additives, and pharmaceuticals.

Providing excellence in intellectual property litigation.

Paul is a partner in the Chicago and Washington D.C. offices of DLA Piper LLP.  Described by as ‘an outstanding IP litigator,’ the 2010 review noted that ‘even though he is relatively young, has already amassed great experience in many aspects of patent disputes such as depositions, settlement negotiations and trials’. He was named a 2009 “40 under forty” attorney in Illinois by the Law Bulletin Publishing Company in a special supplement to the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin and Chicago Lawyer magazine, and has been selected as a 2012 Illinois Super Lawyer. A first-chair trial lawyer, he works primarily on complex patent, trade secret, trademark, copyright and other IP-related litigation matters.  He has been trial counsel to clients in jury trials, before the International Trade Commission investigating Section 337 violations, in Federal and state court appeals, in Markman and other evidentiary hearings, before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, in United States Bankruptcy Court, and in mediations and arbitrations. His public representations include appearances for American clients TransData Inc., Innovolt, Inc., KANA Software, Garmin Ltd., International Truck & Engine Co., Sturman Industries, Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc., Magellan Navigation, Inc., and BCE Emergis Inc., and Pacific Rim clients DENSO CORPORATION, Fuji Heavy Industries (Subaru), Konica Minolta, Kubota Corp., Minolta Corp., Nichia Corp., Rohm Co., Ltd., Matsui Co., Ltd., Nippon Electric Glass Co., Ltd., Mazda Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Corporation. He is the co-author of a book on United States Patent Litigation published in Japanese by AIPPI Japan, another book on the America Invents Act published in Japanese by JIII, and a recent article inIntellectual Property Magazine regarding patent reexamination and review.

Mr. Spence assists individual and business clients in obtaining their best possible outcome in contentious legal matters.  He has extensive experience in litigation, arbitration, and mediation involving all areas of Intellectual Property law.  A registered patent attorney, he serves clients by providing advocacy and advice in the areas of: patent infringement; trade secret misappropriation; unfair competition (including conspiracy, tortious interference, and related antitrust claims); breach of contract; post-grant patent proceedings (e.g., inter partes review) ; trademark infringement; and copyright infringement.. He has litigated claims in both state and federal courts throughout the United States. Additionally, Mr. Spence has extensive experience with patent monetization strategies and complex, international patent infringement litigation involving multiple parties and jurisdictions, including Asia.  He is a published author and frequent speaker on patent monetization and other intellectual property issues, and has been repeatedly recognized as an “Illinois Rising Star” and “Illinois Star,” in the area of intellectual property.. Mr. Spence is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame, where he obtained separate Bachelor of Science Degrees in Chemical Engineering and Biophysics (“Physics in Medicine”). As a student he received the distinction of Notre Dame Scholar and also earned the Monogram Award. Upon graduation from Notre Dame, he received his commission as a Second Lieutenant in the United States Air Force, Medical Service Corps. After completing his military service, he worked for several years in the chemical industry before pursuing his legal education at the University of Houston Law Center.. Prior to forming SpencePC, Mr. Spence spent twelve years practicing law with Kirkland & Ellis LLP in Chicago, IL and Tokyo, Japan.

Joseph F. Janas is an associate and intellectual property lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP where he advises clients on intellectual property issues including U.S. and foreign patent prosecution and patent risk management. He has experience in a number of technical fields, including mobile telephones, medical imaging systems, smart energy devices, agricultural systems, fluid control devices, childcare products, oil drilling systems, firearms and ammunition, financial systems, and internal combustion engines. Mr. Janas is a member of the firm’s Mechanical & Electromechanical Technologies Practice and Technology Industry Team.. Before joining Foley, Mr. Janas was a patent attorney with Hanley, Flight & Zimmerman, L.L.C. His legal experience also includes serving as a summer associate and law clerk with Patterson Thuente Christensen Pedersen, P.A.. Prior to his legal career, Mr. Janas worked as a mechanical engineer with Motorola, Inc. in their Powertrain and Chassis Controls Division (now Continental AG). His experience at Motorola includes design and development of electronic transmission control modules, finite element analysis and computational fluid dynamics simulations, and component failure analysis.

Jill Welytok is a registered patent attorney and CPA, and currently represents over 200 patent and trademark clients including federal government research entities, diversified manufacturing corporations and entrepreneurial start-ups which have obtained investment capital.. Jill is the author of several internationally published books on intellectual property, tax and technology related topics, which have been recognized by members of the U.S Senate and the former Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.. Her most recent books are The Entrepreneur's Guide to Patents, Copyrights, Trademarks, Trade secrets and Licensing (Penguin/Putnam Press 2004) and Sarbanes-Oxley for Dummies (Wiley & Sons 2006).. Jill's areas of expertise include:. Ms. Welytok has participated in copyright litigation matters involving the music and movie industries. She holds a J.D. from DePaul University in Chicago, where she was on the Law Review, and a Masters Degree in Computer Science from Marquette University. Ms. Welytok also holds an LL.M. in Taxation. She was formerly a tax consultant with the predecessor firm to Ernst & Young. She speaks on corporate and nonprofit governance issues and on taxation issues relevant to intellectual property transactions. She is admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the U.S. District Tax Court and in Wisconsin and Illinois.. Ms. Welytok is currently co-authoring the Independent Inventor with Louis Foreman, the producer of the Emmy Award winning Everyday Edisons television show.. The Independent Inventor: Bringing Innovations to Market in Tough Economic Times (Workman Publishers, expected release date: February 2009)Sarbanes-Oxley for Dummies (Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2006)Entrepreneur's Guide to Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Trade Secrets and Licensing (Penguin/Putnam Press July 2004)QuickBooks Bible (Wiley & Sons Publishers) Bestseller List, 1999, 2002, 2004The Online Investing Bible (IDG Books Worldwide Publishers, 2001)Opening Your First Online Investing Account (IDG Books Worldwide Publishers, 2001)MGI PhotoSuite IV for Dummies (IDG Books Worldwide Publishers, 2000)PCAnywhere for Dummies (IDG Books Worldwide Publishers, 2000)How to Do Everything With Your Scanner (McGraw Hill Publishers, 2002)Teach Yourself TurboTax in 24 Hours (Macmillan Publishers, 1999) Bestseller list

I try very hard to provide the highest quality service to my clients at a reasonable price.  With advanced degrees in sciences, strong legal education and training, and many years of industrial experience as a scientist and inventor, I have what it takes to produce a top quality work product consistently and to the satisfaction of the clients.   Preparing patent application is a serious task and I have spent most of my legal career on that activity.  When you want a quality patent application, you cannot entrust it to someone who prosecutes patents only as a second choice.

I have enjoyed a wide range of experience in patent and other intellectual property litigation covering a broad range of technologies including electrical, mechanical and chemical cases.  The thread connecting these litigations and my experience in patent prosecution and related corporate issues is creative problem solving.  I enjoy working within legal, financial and practical bounds to help clients reach near and long term goals.. In addition to my basic goal of serving my clients, I hope to bring along the next-generation of service-oriented, creative lawyers.. While my specialty is patent litigation, I am frequently involved in complex patent prosecution, patent-related corporate transactions, as well as copyright and trademark issues, and IP licensing.  I am also involved in a significant amount of antitrust counseling and litigation issues, which is generally, but not exclusively, IP-based.

I am an intellectual property attorney licensed to practice in the State of Illinois. I am interested in the intersection of law, technology, and society. I have experience working on patent prosecution matters for clients in the following technology spaces: bitcoin/blockchain; financial technologies; business methods; trading systems; network and internet communication; navigation and routing; medical imaging; and medical devices.

David C. Brezina is of Counsel in the Chicago office of Ladas & Parry LLP. As an Intellectual Property law practitioner he has developed well-balanced experience handling patent, trademark and copyright matters. His litigation experience includes multifaceted cases having issues of patent, trademark, trade dress, copyright, trade secret, advertising and competition, especially where those issues intersect and overlap. He has appeared in more than 100 lawsuits, and settled others without appearing. He has also taught graduate and undergraduate law courses and delivered continuing education presentations covering these topics. With this experience in prosecuting and litigating intellectual property matters as well as negotiating and strategic counseling, Dave enjoys helping clients solve problems at whatever level the solution is needed.. For more than 20 years, Dave has taught law courses. This includes, “Entrepreneurship: Basic Business Principles,” “Entertainment Law,” and “Legal Aspects of Entertainment, Publishing and the Arts,” which were taught at Columbia College of Chicago. Dave also has been an adjunct professor in the Center for Intellectual Property Law of The John Marshall Law School in Chicago for more than 10 years, where he currently teaches “Trademark Law” and has taught “Antitrust and Misuse Aspects of Intellectual Property Law.”. Dave has lectured frequently and published numerous articles on law and litigation, with the subject matter usually focusing on patents, trademarks, trade dress and copyrights. The articles have been published in both legal and trade publications, including The Trademark Reporter, Landslide and the Chicago Bar Record, with one scheduled to appear in the Spring 2018 Review of Intellectual Property Law.. Dave received his B.S.S. in political science from Cornell College with undergraduate scientific training concentrated in oceanography. Dave earned his J.D. with honors from the Illinois Institute of Technology – Chicago Kent College of Law in 1978, and an LL.M. in intellectual property law from The John Marshall Law School in 1988. The thesis, co-authored with partner Burt Ehrlich, was entitled “Antitrust and Misuse Aspects of Intellectual Property Law” and was used as Dave’s textbook for his LLM class of the same name.. Dave has been active in the Chicago, Illinois and American Bar Associations, as well as the Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago including chairmanship of several committee. He has been active in the Bohemian Lawyers Association of Chicago (BLAC) where he is a Past President. He has been ranked on various lawyer listings including Superlawyers, The Best Lawyers in America, and Illinois Leading Lawyer by the Leading Lawyers Network and has a Martindale-Hubbell AV rating.. Executive and Board of Directors experience has included, in addition to the BLAC, above, Managing Partner at Lee, Mann, Smith, McWilliams, Sweeney & Ohlson; Commodore of the Chicago Corinthian Yacht Club and Board service for Project LEAP (Legal Elections in All Precincts), Lincoln Park Advisory Council and the Chicago Harbor Safety Committee. Dave was issued Merchant Mariner Credentials on July 9, 2020 as a Master Mariner, including sail endorsement, by the United States Coast Guard.. Dave is admitted to practice in Illinois, before the U.S. Supreme Court the Federal, Seventh and Ninth Circuits and a number of U.S. District Courts. He is registered before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.. REPRESENTATIVE CASES. In Custom Accessories, Inc. v. Jeffrey-Allan Industries, Inc., 807 F.2d 955, 1 USPQ2d 1196 (Fed. Cir. 1985), after winning this patent infringement for the defense in a one-day trial on the merits, the Federal Circuit remanded for further proceedings. This case involved cross-town rivals in automotive aftermarket accessories.. Mucha v. King 792 F.2d 502 (7th Cir, 1986) involved a ‘long lost’ painting was not really ‘lost’, the heirs of the artist recovering a painting placed in a bailment 70 years before. Because of the cultural importance of the artist, Dave has also discussed this case before an Art Law class and bar association groups.. In Plastiques Anchor v. Quinn David, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12535, (ND Ill 1992) a preliminary injunction motion was soundly defeated in this trademark and trade dress case involving plastic bicycle racks. The judge remarked that it appeared that the trademark might not be owned by plaintiff, instead being owned by Dave’s client, the US distributor.. After prove-up of damages, a half-million dollar judgment was entered in favor of the client, a Nicaraguan brewery, in this trademark infringement case Compania Cervecera De Nicaragua v. Cervezas Victoria y Tona Beers Inc. 28 USPQ 2d 1870 (MD Fla 1993). Ultimately a compromised amount was collected from the co-defendant private label brewer.. Rasmussen v. The West, Inc. 28 USPQ 2d 1958 (N.D.Ill, 1993) was a copyright infringement case in which the client, plaintiff, defeated a motion to dismiss on personal jurisdiction grounds, interpreting the Illinois Long Arm statute to be satisfied when defendant made two mail order purchases from plaintiff and then infringed the work obtained.. In Carbonara v. Olmos 1994 WL 370031 March 4, 1994. (CD Cal 1994) the published decision dealt with a novel procedural point in a deceptive trade practices and false advertising case arising out of bogus celebrity endorsements. After removal to, and transfer from the Northern District of Illinois, the case was remanded back from the Central District of California to state court in Cook County, Illinois, an unprecedented procedure at the time. Settlement was obtained for the clients after oral argument of Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.. Storck USA, L.P. v. Farley Candy Co., Inc., 14 F.3d 311, 29 USPQ 2d 1431 (7th Cir. 1994) was decided after replacing counsel who lost two preliminary injunctions based on trademark and trade dress claims. An attempt at a third preliminary injunction was defeated and affirmed on appeal, in part because of the survey evidence offered for the defense.. In Respect Inc. v. Fremgen 897 F. Supp. 361; 889 F. Supp. 340; 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8864; 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1278, (ND Ill 1995), a copyright infringement case, summary judgment successfully limited damage exposure to the point where the case settled.. Microsoft Corp. v. Logical Choice Computers, Inc., 42 UCC 727, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10972, 2000 WL 1038143 (ND Ill 2000) was a trademark and copyright infringement case, in which the defendant client, a software distributor, was dismissed from the third-party case.. In Trek Bicycle Corp. v. Alyx Fier, 56 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1527 (TTAB 2000) summary judgment in favor of the client was obtained in a trademark opposition in which fame of our client’s mark was established. The industry involved was sports products, specifically bicycles.. Holland Co. v. Zeftek, Inc., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13015 (ND Ill 2001) was a case in which Dave’s client, the plaintiff, successfully defeated defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this patent infringement case. This lead to prompt settlement.. In Thane Int’I, Inc. v. Trek Bicycle Corp., No. 00-55293, 00-55599, 305 F.3d 894, 64 USPQ2d 1564, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 18344 (9th Cir. 2002) a successful appeal overturned summary judgment in this trademark infringement case. This was obtained after joining the team from the firm that was originally unsuccessful.. Home Raters, Inc. v. Blumenthal, 2005 Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P29,038; 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24206 (ND Ill 2005) was a copyright infringement case that established that under copyright, distinguishing other areas of the law, there is a right to attorneys’ fees as costs after acceptance of an unconditional offer of judgment.. Waterloo Furniture Components, Ltd. v. Haworth, Inc., 467 F.3d 641; 80 U.S.P.Q.2d 1675 (7th Cir. 2006) summary judgment for Dave’s client, a defendant in a breach of contract case, was obtained based on the expiration of the license agreement and the subject patent, despite the presence of a most- favored-nations clause.. In Through the Country Door v. J.C. Penney Co., 83 USPQ2d 1538, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23975, (WD Wis 2007), a trademark, trade dress and copyright infringement case, a motion to dismiss was defeated. The trade dress count and state law unfair trade practices count, joined with a copyright infringement count for imitation and copying of retail catalogs survived the motion to dismiss. The case was settled on terms maintained confidentially.. AFFCO New Zealand v American Fine Foods 913 F. 1331 (S.D. Fla., 2012) denied the Defense motion for summary judgment on two counts seeking to enforce a breach of a contract settling a trademark opposition.

As founder and principal of Beem Patent Law Firm, Richard Beem is dedicated to serving clients in patent matters, and he is grateful for the trust of clients and referrers alike.  Mr. Beem has more than 20 years of experience in patent law and practice, representing clients in every technology and industry, in the U.S. and worldwide, including preparation, filing, prosecution, litigation, trials and appeals.. After graduating with honors from the University of Houston Law Center, Mr. Beem was privileged to serve for two years as Law Clerk to the Honorable Edward S. Smith, Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Washington, D.C. During his tenure he assisted the Judge in hundreds of appeals from the Patent Office and federal courts and tribunals, including many landmark decisions in patent cases.  Upon completing the Federal Circuit clerkship in 1987, Mr. Beem entered the private practice of patent law in Chicago, representing clients locally, nationally and internationally in patent matters.Mr. Beem appreciates referrals and, recognizing the value that referrers provide to their clients, he is responsive to instructions and communicative regarding progress of cases. He often acts as co-counsel with referring lawyers in patent infringement litigation in U.S. district courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC); and appeals in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. For more details concerning Mr. Beem’s experience and a list of his cases and publications, see .