When he learned that intellectual property attorneys typically focus on either patent prosecution or litigation, Andy disagreed (of course).  Pouring himself into both sides of intellectual property practice, Andy now specializes in both patent and trademark litigation and patent prosecution, and is a leading member of the firm’s inter partes review practice group.  The breadth of his practice allows Andy to offer his clients a complete and integrated strategy to intellectual property protection and enforcement.

A good argument requires a strong foundation.  Andy’s scientific background in applied physics and engineering provides him with a strong foundation to assist clients in a variety of different industries and technologies.  His diverse technological experience enables Andy to handle issues unique to various areas of patent prosecution, including software and electronics, automotive technology, medical devices and treatments, telecommunications, or materials sciences.  And his love of argument frequently results in the procurement of patents for his clients.

A client’s business objectives rarely end when a patent or trademark issues.  Enforcing intellectual property, or protecting oneself from the allegations of others, is a critical aspect of a complete business strategy.  In this area, Andy has extensive experience fighting for his client’s interests in both intellectual property litigation and post-grant practice.  In court, Andy has litigated cases across the United States, and has successfully enforced his clients’ patents and trademarks on numerous occasions against unfair competitors.  Likewise, Andy has defended his clients from the spurious claims of patent trolls in the Eastern District of Texas and beyond.  In the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Andy has successfully argued before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to invalidate the claims of competitors’ patents in inter partes review.  Whether on offense or defense, patents or trademarks, Andy has argued to protect his client’s interests.

When he cannot find a willing or worthy adversary, Andy also writes a chapter on Noninfringement and Invalidity Opinions in the American Intellectual Property Law Association’s Electronic and Software Patents textbook, which is updated annually.  On multiple occasions, Andy has spoken at the Pennsylvania Bar Institute’s IP Law Institute on the subject of patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Andy has been named a Pennsylvania Rising Star for many years in the areas of intellectual property and intellectual property litigation.