Brendan McLaughlin joined Ropes & Gray in 2019 in the intellectual property litigation group. Brendan represents clients in a variety of intellectual property matters, including patent, trademark, copyright, and false advertising disputes. Brendan has worked on litigation matters in federal district court, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the International Trade Commission.
During law school, Brendan was a law clerk for the International Trade Commission’s Office of Unfair Import Investigations. Brendan was also a law clerk for the United States House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary where he focused on patent and antitrust issues. Before joining Ropes & Gray, Brendan drafted and prosecuted patent applications at a boutique intellectual property law firm.
- Gayle v. Villamarin (S.D.N.Y.): Successfully defended a pro bono client against claims of copyright and trademark infringement.
- Representing a global pharmaceutical company in a pre-litigation investigation concerning multiple biologics patents under the BPCIA.
- Natera, Inc. v. Genosity (D. Del.): Represented Genosity in a patent litigation case brought by Natera relating to genetic testing kits.
- Natera, Inc. v. ArcherDX, Inc. (D. Del.): Represented ArcherDX in patent infringement cases filed by Natera relating to methods of amplifying and sequencing cell-free DNA.
- Ropes & Gray LLP, D2021-0011 (UDRP): On behalf of the firm, secured a transfer of a domain name confusingly similar to Ropes & Gray’s trademark from cybersquatters.
- Certain Electronic Devices, Including Streaming Players, Televisions, Set Top Boxes, Remote Controllers, and Components Thereof, 337-TA-1200 (ITC): Defending Roku Inc. against claims of infringement in a six-patent case relating to remote control programming technology.
- Supercell OY v. Gree, Inc., PGR2020-00063 (PTAB): Successfully defended Gree, Inc. from a post-grant review petition challenging a patent on §§ 101, 102, 103, and 112 grounds.
- Represented a Leading Medical Device Company in the Northern District of California in a trade secret, contract, and copyright case involving technologies for flow cytometers.
- Co-author, “Is Work From Home a U.S. Venue Work-Around? ” Kluwer Patent Blog (January 11, 2022)
- Co-author, “Patent Eligibility Is Becoming Increasingly Relevant At ITC,” Law360 (November 29, 2021)
- Co-author, “ITC Already Has Authority Offered By Trade Secret Misuse Bill,” Law360 (July 13, 2021)
- Profiled, “The ABCs of the ITC,” Law.com Skilled In the Art (May 21, 2021)
- Co-author, “Bill Curtailing NPE Suits At ITC Could Restructure Licensing,” Law360 (September 16, 2020)
- Co-author, “What if Gov’t Allows Patent Infringement for COVID-19 Drugs?” Law360 (April 1, 2020)
- Co-author, “ITC May Be Straying From Traditional Exclusion Order Test,” Law360 (December 17, 2019)
- Author, “Are ITC Cease and Desist Orders Overstepping Statutory Constraints?,” 42 337 Reporter 44 (2018)
- Contributor, 337 Reporter Monthly Round-Up (2020 – Present)
- JD, Georgetown University Law Center, 2019
- BS (Biology), Syracuse University, 2014
Admissions / Qualifications
- District of Columbia, 2020
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Agent, 2017
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2022
- U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 2021