Scott A. McKeown

Partner

scott-mckeown
  • JD, Temple University Beasley School of Law, 1999
  • BS (Electrical Engineering), with honors, Temple University, 1993

Qualifications

  • District of Columbia, 2018
  • Pennsylvania, 1999
  • Virginia, 2004
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 1998

Court Admissions

  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
  • Supreme Court of Virginia
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 2019
  • PTAB Bar Association, Board of Directors
  • American Bar Association
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)
  • Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
  • Temple University Engineering – Top 50 Engineers (2023)
  • Managing Intellectual Property "Patent Star" (2022)
  • IAM Global Leaders: The World’s Leading IP Strategists (2022)
  • Managing IP Magazine: Americas “Outstanding Litigator PTAB” (2020) 
  • Lexology Legal Influencer – Dispute Resolution: US and IP: US (2018)
  • IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists (2018-2019)
  • Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
  • The Legal 500 US (2012, 2015, 2018)
  • Managing IP Magazine: Virginia “Litigator of the Year” (2017)
  • Managing IP Magazine: PTAB “Litigator of the Year” (2015)
  • Best Lawyers in America: Litigation–Intellectual Property (2015-2017, 2019-2023)
  • Best Lawyers in America: Patent Law (2023) 
  • The Best Lawyers in America - Lawyer of the Year (2021)
  • Super Lawyers (2020-2021)
  • IAM Patent 1000: The World's Leading Patent Practitioners
  • Managing IP Magazine: “IP Star” (2013-2018)
  • The National Law Journal: IP Trailblazers & Pioneers (2014)
  • Temple University: Gallery of Success (2013)

Scott A. McKeown

Partner

Scott McKeown is a partner in Ropes & Gray’s intellectual property litigation practice and chair of the firm’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) group. He focuses his practice on post-grant patent counseling and litigation matters at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and related appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Scott handles all aspects of post-issuance patent proceedings, specializing in administrative trials before the PTAB, such as inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR). He also provides advice on USPTO post-grant proceedings concurrent with complex International Trade Commission (ITC) and district court litigations.

Named one of the world’s leading patent practitioners for post-grant proceedings by Intellectual Asset Management, Scott is one of the most active PTAB trial attorneys in the U.S., having handled more than 300 PTAB matters since 2012, including those in which more than $500 million was at stake. He currently serves as lead post-grant counsel to some of the world’s best-known innovators and has handled some of the most noteworthy PTAB trials to date, including the only precedential decision on live testimony. Moreover, he was recently named by Managing IP as its “Outstanding PTAB Litigator” for 2020.

As a Professorial Lecturer in Law at The George Washington University Law School and a member of the teaching faculty of the Practising Law Institute, Scott lectures and writes extensively on PTAB proceedings. He is a founding Board member of the PTAB Bar Association and a contributing editor to the Sedona Conference Working Group 10: Patent Litigation Best Practices. Scott also maintains an award-winning blog, PatentsPostGrant.com, which examines developments in patent litigation, including issues related to USPTO post issuance proceedings. 

Prior to becoming an attorney, Scott worked as an electrical engineer for a government agency, troubleshooting embedded systems and circuit designs. He also has experience across a wide range of related technologies, including computer software, wireless telecommunication protocols, network architectures, e-commerce applications, analog and digital signal processing, and consumer electronics.

Experience

  • Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Equil IP Holdings LLP (IPR2023-00329-00332) – Representing Akamai in challenging patents related to web-based graphic processing.
  • Ericsson et al. v. Godo Kaisha IP Bridge (IPR2022-00725; 00726; and 00755) – Representing IP Bridge in defense of patents pertaining to orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing, and related signaling protocols. These IPRs were denied institution.
  • WFR IP LLC. V. GN Audio USA Inc. (D.Del – 2022) – Representing GN in two patent suit directed to wireless headphones.
  • Ericcson et al. v. Collision Communications Inc. (IPR2022-01233) – Representing Collision in defending its patent directed to noise suppression in multi-user carrier wireless signaling environments.
  • SAP America v. Express Mobile (IPR2022-00518) – Representing SAP in challenging patents related to web page building interfaces. IPR instated and all claims cancelled.
  • Inari Agriculture – Challenge to patents of Dow Bioscience directed to gene editing of seeds for obvious type double patenting.90/019,131; 90/019,138; and 90/019,130
  • Signify North America Corp., & Signify Holding B.V. v. All Star Lighting Supplies, Inc. (DNJ -2022) Defense of All Star Lighting in six patent infringement suit directed to LED lighting fixtures. This matter settled favorably.
  • GN Audio A/S et al v. Snik LLC (NDCA - 2022) – Action for declaratory judgment on behalf of GN audio entities (6 patents relating to magnet-secured recharging of wireless headphones). This matter settled favorably.
  • Roku v. Universal Electronics (IPR2022-00943; IPR2022-01289) – Representing Roku in challenging patents relating to voice control and home automation systems.
  • Exactech Inc v. Zimmer et al. (IPR2022-00836-00841; and 00910) – Representing Exactech is challenging patents relating to orthopedic surgery tools and visualization systems. Successful institution; thereafter the matter settled favorably.
  • ThroughPuter Inc., v. Microsoft Inc. (IPR2022-00527; 00528; 00574; 00757; 00758 and 01566) – Representing ThroughPuter in defending patents directed to multi-user, parallel processing systems. Institution Denied in 00757 and 00758
  • EPL Limited v. Colgate-Palmolive (PGR2022-0001) – Represented Colgate-Palmolive in defense of patent directed to recyclable toothpaste containers. Settled favorably prior to institution.
  • A Global Leader in Medical Technology, Services, and Solutions (IPR2021-00239; 00243- and 00244) – Challenged patents directed to heart valves and mechanisms for the placement thereof.  All claims cancelled.
  • Cellink AB v. Organovo Inc.(IPR2021-1049; 0150; 01543; 01544) – Representing CellInk AB in challenging directed to printing of cellular structures.
  • Ideal Industries Lighting LLC d/b/a Cree Lighting v. RAB Lighting Inc. (IPR2021-00646; and 00655) – Representing RAB Lighting in defending patents directed to LED lighting fixtures. This matter settled favorably.
  • Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks (IPR2021-01147-01151; and 01153-01158; 01270; and PGR2021-00108) – Representing Palo Alto Networks in challenging a patent portfolio related to packet filtering.
  • Lumenis Be. Ltd v. BTL Healthcare Technologies A.S. (IPR2021-01273; 01275; 01276; 01278-01280; 01282-01285; and 01402-01405) – Representing Lumenis in challenging a patent portfolio related to electrical stimulation of muscles for muscle toning.
  • Schaeffler Group USA Inc. v. BorgWarner Ithaca LLC (IPR2020-01482) – Representing BorgWarner in defense of patent directed to variable cam timing phaser for automotive engines. Institution denied and matter settled favorably
  • SuperCell Oy v. Gree Inc. (IPR2021-00499-501) Representing Gree Inc. Successfully defended three patents directed to MMORPG player classification and matching. Institutions denied and matter settled favorably.
  • SuperCell Oy v. Gree Inc. (PGR2020-00063) – Representing Gree Inc. Successfully defended virtual reality patent. Institution denied and matter settled favorably.
  • Amp Plus Inc., dba Elco Lighting v. DMF Inc. (IPR2019-01094) – Representing DMF in defending patent related to a lighting fixture assembly litigated in Central District of California. Litigated claims upheld by PTAB.
  • Samsung Electronics Co., LTD, and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., v. Ultravision Technologies, LLC (IPR2020-01173-1175) – Representing Samsung in challenging patents related to large-format modular display systems. These matters favorably settled pre-trial.
  • Dolby Laboratories Inc. v. Intertrust Technologies Corp. (IPR2020-00660 - 664, IPR2020-01104-01106, IPR2020-01123; IPR2020-01273, IPR2020-1209) – Representing Dolby in challenging patents related to digital rights management (DRM) systems.
  • Samsung Electronics Co., LTD, and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., v. Cellect, LLC (IPR2020-00472-00477, IPR2020-00512, IPR2020-00559-00569, IPR2020-00571-00572, Reexaminations 90/014,452 – 457) – Representing Samsung in challenging patents related to reduced area camera assemblies. All IPR challenged claims cancelled.
  • Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Packet Intelligence LLC. (IPR2020-00335-00338, IPR2020-00485-00486) – Representing Palo Alto Networks in challenging patents in ongoing PTAB IPR trials relating to packet classification, switching and monitoring. All challenged claims cancelled.
  • Roku, Inc. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha (IPR2020-00341-00359) – Represented Roku in challenging patents relating to display and interface technologies. These matters favorably settled pre-trial.
  • Baxter Corp v. American Medical Technology Company (IPR2020-00024, IPR2020-00025, IPR2020-00026, IPR2020-00027) – Defended an American medical technology company against IPR challenges directed to its patents on antimicrobial medical valves and assemblies. All such IPR challenges were denied by the PTAB.
  • A Major U.S. Auto Manufacturer. v. Carrum Technologies, LLC. (IPR2020-00055, IPR2012-00056, IPR2020-00057) – Representing a major U.S. auto manufacturer in challenging patents related to adaptive cruise control systems and methodologies.  
  • A Major Technology Company . v. Anywhere Commerce (IPR2019-01625, IPR2019-01626, IPR2019-01627, IPR2019-01628, IPR2019-01629, IPR2019-01630) – Representing a major technology company in challenging patents related to mobile payment systems and associated payment processing methodologies. All challenged claims cancelled and litigation dismissed.
  • A Major Multinational Telecommunications Equipment Company v. L3Harris Technologies (IPR2019-01512, IPR2019-01570, IPR2019-01631) – Represented a Major Multinational Telecommunications Equipment Company in challenging patents related to telecommunication switching, protocol processing, and network management. This matter settled favorably pre-trial.
  • A Leading Consumer Electronics Company (IPR2016-00834, CAFC-18-1172) – In a precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit successfully vacated the decision of the PTAB in an IPR. The PTAB reversed its earlier determination on remand in favor of patent owner Sony.
  • American Medical Technology Company v. Baxter Corp. (IPR2019-00119, IPR2019-00120, IPR2019-00121) – Representing an American medical technology company in ongoing PTAB IPR trials relating to automated methods of preparing pharmaceutical dosages.
  • Dolby Laboratories Inc. v. Intertrust Technologies Corp. (ND California) – Representing Dolby in a declaratory judgement action relating to audio/video processing systems. This matter settled favorably.
  • Represented the World’s Leading Consumer Electronics Company in multiple appeals (Nos. 18-1987, 18-1988, 18-2092, 18-2114, 18-2115, 18-1529, 18-1531) at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit resulting from inter partes review proceedings involving four patents directed towards methods and systems for transferring data between computers/host devices and data transmitting/receiving devices. Secured critical wins and notable precedent on questions of claim preclusion.
  • Delphi Technologies Inc. v. Microchip Technology Inc. (IPR2017-00861, IPR2017-00864) – Challenged patents relating to multi-host USB control circuitry. Secured affirmance of critical claim cancellations at the PTAB.
  • A Leading Multinational Technology Company v. Spring Ventures LTD (IPR2017-01653) – Successfully challenged Spring Ventures patent directed to software interfaces, resulting in the cancellation of all challenged claims, and defeating a motion to amend. Secured summary affirmance of the PTAB win on appeal to the Federal Circuit.
  • Sukup Mfg. Co v. Sioux Steel Co. (IPR2019-000316) – Representing Patent Owner Sioux Steel in defending its patented technology relating to automated farming equipment (favorably settled).
  • Unified Patents v. Uniloc 2017 LLC  (IPR2019-01126) – Representing Unified Patents in challenging Uniloc patent directed to motion estimation in video compression.
  • Unified Patents v. Portal Communications (IPR2019-00513) – Representing Unified Patents in challenging Portal Communication pertaining to a natural language search interface. (All challenged claims cancelled, multiple attempts at amending denied). 
  • Unified Patents v. SpeakWare Inc (IPR2019-00495) – Representing Unified Patents in challenging SpeakWare patent relating to voice recognition technology. (Favorably settled)
  • Unified Patents v. Universal Cipher (IPR2019-00498) – Representing Unified Patents in challenging Universal Cipher’s patent pertaining to encryption technology. (Favorably settled)
  • Solar Junction Corporation v. IQE plc (DER2018-00019) – Represent IQE, a semiconductor wafer manufacturer, and its employees in a derivation proceeding at the PTAB.
  • SIPCO, LLC v. RAB Lighting Inc. (D.N.J) – Represented RAB Lighting in a 6-patent lawsuit relating to wireless communications for lighting systems. (favorably settled)
  • Intel Corp. V. Godo Kaisha IP Bridge (IPR2018-01487, IPR2018-01486, IPR2018-01408, IPR2018-01407, IPR2018-01406, IPR2018-01404, IPR2018-01155, IPR2018-00987, IPR2018-00951, IPR2018-00753, IPR2018-00756) – Represented IP Bridge in numerous IPR proceedings directed to semiconductor fabrication and operation. (favorably settled)
  • SuperCell Oy v. Gree Inc. (PGR2018-00064, PGR2018-00070, PGR2018-000071, PGR2019-00018) – Successfully defended against institution in 3 of 4 proceedings related to mobile video gaming technology. One trial remains ongoing before the PTAB.
  • Prairie Land Millwright Services Inc. v. Sioux Steel Co. (IPR2016-01873) – Successfully secured a final written decision for Patent Owner Sioux Steel upholding all challenged claims of a pioneering patent in the field of grain bin sweeps. Successfully defended the IPR win on appeal before the Federal Circuit, securing a summary affirmance.
  • GN Hearing A/S v. Oticon A/S (IPR2017-01926, IPR2017-01927) – Successfully challenged every claim of two separate patents directed to hearing aid technology between close competitors.
  • Sportbrain Holdings LLC v. GN Netcom, Inc. et al. (N.D. Ill.) – Represented GN Netcom in defending patent infringement claims relating to wireless headphones and applications relating thereto. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case prior to the Answer after GN Netcom alleged lack of a Rule 11 basis for Plaintiff’s infringement claims.
  • Comcast v. Rovi  – Represented Rovi and Tivo in 40+ IPR proceedings related to interactive electronic program guide technology.
  • Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC (U.S. Sup. Ct.) – Co-authored an amicus brief on behalf of the world’s leading consumer electronics company, supporting the respondent, in a case addressing the authority of the USPTO’s Patent Trial & Appeal Board to rule on the patentability of issued patents in inter partes review proceedings.
  • TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC (U.S. Sup. Ct.) – Co-authored an amicus brief on behalf of an interested party, supporting the petitioner, in a case addressing the appropriate scope of venue in patent litigation.*
  • HID Global Inc. v. MorphoTrust USA LLC (IPR2017-01938, IPR2017-01939, IPR2017-01940, IPR2017-01941) – Defended patents directed to secure credential technologies.
  • Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee LLC (U.S. Sup. Ct.) – Co-authored an amicus brief on behalf of an interested party, supporting the respondent, in a case addressing the propriety of the broadest reasonable claim construction standard (BRI) for in USPTO Patent Trial & Appeal Board proceedings.* 
  • ClearCorrect Operating LLC v. Align Technology Inc. (IPR2016-00270) – All challenged claims of a patent directed to Invisalign® dental appliances canceled. Appeal pending before the CAFC. (favorably settled)*
  • Arris International et al. v. Sony Corp. (IPR2016-00827, IPR2016-00828) – Represented patent owner. Defended patents directed to video processing technology. All challenges denied by the PTAB.*
  • Viasat v. Advanced Media Networks (IPR2016-00628, IPR2016-00629, IPR2016-00795, IPR2016-00796) – Defended patents directed to mobile WiFi technology. All challenges denied by the PTAB.*
  • J-Squared Inc. d/b/a University Loft v. Sauder Woodworking (IPR2015-00774, IPR2015-00958) – Successfully challenged claims to a modular chair design. Appeals pending before the CAFC.*
  • A Leading Multinational Technology Company v. Rockstar Consortium (IPR2015-00090, 91, 197, 200-202, 206-7, 210-12, 215, 235-36) – Filed 14 IPRs against the former Nortel patent portfolio relating to telecommunication methodologies and interfaces. Settled on behalf of client.*
  • eBay Inc. v. MoneyCat Ltd. (CBM2014-00091, CBM2014-00093) – Claims directed to electronic payment systems cancelled on behalf of client eBay.*
  • Eastman Kodak Company, AGFA Corp., Esko Software BVBA and Heidelberg USA v. CTP Innovations LLC (IPR2014-00788-91) – Filed IPRs on behalf of the largest printing companies in the world. Successfully derailed a patent assertion campaign lodged against small to medium size pre-press printing companies across the country. Appeals pending before the CAFC.*
  • Square Inc. v. REM Holdings LLC (IPR2014-00312, Reexamination 95/001618, 95/001,620) – Prevailed on behalf of the challenger in canceling all challenged claims of patents directed to mobile payment hardware.*
  • Time Warner Cable, Paramount Studios; et al v. Nissim Corp. (IPR2014-00961, IPR2014-00962) – Represented patent owner in defending patents directed to DVD technology. All challenges denied by PTAB.*
  • Sony Mobile v. Adaptix Inc. (IPR2014-01524, IPR 2014-01525) – PTAB instituted trial in IPR2014-01524 as to all challenged claims of Adaptix patent 6,947,748. On May 19, 2015, all challenged claims of Adaptix patent 7,454,212 were canceled in IPR2014-01525.*
  • E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. Merck & Co. Inc. and Intervet International B.V. (Interference 106,016) – Prevailed in a patent interference directed to veterinary medicine on behalf of DuPont (Senior Party 12/663,848).*
  • Cisco Systems Inc. v. RPX Clearinghouse (IPR2014-01220) – Settled, post-institution on behalf of Cisco.*
  • Innolux Corp v. Semiconductor Energy Labs(IPR2013-00028, 00038, 00060, 00064, 00065, 00066, 00068) – Challenged the semiconductor patents of Semiconductor Energy Labs (SEL) directed to complex TFT semiconductors and manufacturing methodologies. Seven IPRs were filed attacking several hundred claims in total, all of which were instituted by the PTAB. As a result of these IPRs, the litigation between the companies was stayed, and the dispute settled.*
  • K40 Electronics LLC v. Escort Inc.(IPR2013-00203, IPR2013-00240) – In the first and only IPR to date to include live testimony, the PTAB found in favor of client K40 Electronics, canceling all challenged claims.*
  • Unified Patents Inc. v. Clouding IP LLC (IPR2013-00586) – The PTAB granted a total victory for Unified Patents, finding all challenged claims unpatentable and denying patent owner’s motion to amend.*
  • GSI Commerce Solutions v. Clear With Computers (CBM2013-00055) – Settled on behalf of GSI.*
  • Ariosa Diagnostics v. Isis Innovation(IPR2012-00022, IPR2013-00250, 00276, 00277, 00308) – Ariosa is the leading provider of noninvasive prenatal tests for genetic anomalies.*

*Experience prior to joining Ropes & Gray

Publications

Presentations

  • Speaker, “Patent Litigation Variation: The PTAB vs. ITC vs. District Court,” IPWatchdog Patent Litigation Masters 2023 (May 16, 2023)
  • Speaker “Ethics Before the PTAB,” PTAB Bar Association (March 8-10, 2023)
  • Speaker, "Expert Witnesses: Choosing, Working With and Examining an Expert in a Patent Case," IP Watchdog Patent Litigation Masters (May 23-24, 2022)
  • Speaker, “Practice and Issues Before the PTAB,” UT Law 2022 Advanced Patent Law Institute (March 17, 2022)
  • Speaker, “The PTAB Tomorrow: Top 5 Most Important Issues Facing the PTAB & New Director in 2022,” IP Watchdog PTAB Masters Symposium (January 24-27, 2022)
  • Speaker, “Recent Developments and the Future Direction of IPR Proceedings,” ACI’s PTAB Practice Briefing (December 2, 2021)
  • Speaker, “Keeping Up With Developments at the PTAB,” IAM's 2021 IP Conference (November 2-3, 2021)
  • Speaker, “Realities of Succeeding in PTAB Trials 2: Prosecuting for the PTAB,” Elevate Your Prosecution 2021 Conference (September 25, 2021)
  • Moderator, “Master Class,” PTAB Bar Association Annual Conference (September 22-24, 2021)
  • Speaker, “Strategies and Tactics for Winning at the PTAB,” IP Watchdog Conference (September 12-14, 2021) 
  • Speaker, “Discretionary Denials Revisited: The New Politics of Fintiv,” AIPLA Webinar (July 20, 2021)
  • Speaker, “The PTAB and the Western Way: How Judge Albright's Court and the Board Interact,” Unified Patents Webinar (April 1, 2021)
  • Speaker, “PTAB 2021 – Targeting a Moving Target,” PLI Webinar (March 8, 2021)
  • Speaker, “Insights from the PTAB Bench,” Ropes & Gray PTAB Webinar (February 24, 2021)
  • Speaker, "PTAB Developments and What They Mean For 2021," WIPR Webinar (February 23, 2021) 
  • Speaker, “A Conversation Series Exploring the Regulatory Impacts of the 2020 Election: 2020 Election and Intellectual Property,” R&G Transition Tuesdays Webinar (November 24, 2020)  
  • Speaker, “State of Play at the PTAB,” IAM’s IP 2020 (November 19, 2020)
  • Speaker, “Reexaminations Reborn: Strategies for Filing Ex Parte Reexaminations,” Unified Patents Webinar (November 19, 2020) 
  • Chair, PLI’s Advanced Patent Trial and Appeal Board Trial Strategies (September 9, 2020)
  • Speaker, “Patents at the PTAB: How the Times Have Changed (or Not),” IP Watchdog Virtual Conference (September 1, 2020)
  • Speaker, “U.S. Patent Litigation & Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) Trends,” 2020 Korea IP Summer Forum (August 27, 2020)
  • Speaker, “Defining the PTAB: Click-to-Call and Windy City,” IPO Chat Channel Webinar (May 7, 2020)
  • Panelist, “What You Need to Know about Recent Changes in AIA Trial Proceedings: Key cases and issues for Federal Circuit appeals of AIA trial proceedings and co-pending district court and IPR proceedings,” IPR panel at the AIPLA Spring meeting (May 6-8, 2020)
  • Speaker, “Patent Reexamination and Patent Reissue as Litigation Tools: Insulating Your Patent Portfolio From New Threats,” Strafford Webinar (January 28, 2020)
  • Speaker, “Using PTAB Proceedings to Challenge and Defend Patents,” Strafford Webinar (December 12, 2019)
  • Speaker “Arthrex/Polaris – The Evolving Impact of the PTAB Appointments Clause Debate,” PLI's One-Hour Briefing (December 11, 2019)
  • Speaker, “Overview of Developments at the PTAB,” IAM Patent Litigation 2019 (November 5, 2019)
  • Speaker, “Serial Petitions and Discretionary Denials: Pre-Institution Strategies for Petitioners and Patent Owners,” 2019 PTAB Bench + Bar (June 27, 2019)
  • Speaker, “The Summer of Patentable Subject Matter,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (June 17, 2019)
  • Speaker, "Patent Derivation, Inventorship Disputes and Trade Secret Misappropriation: Protecting Proprietary Research,” Strafford Legal Webinar (June 12, 2019)
  • Speaker, “Strategies for Efficient PTAB Defense,” MIP Innovation & Litigation Summit 2019 (June 11, 2019)
  • Speaker, "Standard Essential Patent (SEP) Licensing Demystified,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (April 30, 2019)
  • Speaker, “"Patent Infringement & The PTAB: The Emergence of a Bifurcated System?," AIPLA CLE Webinar (April 17, 2019)
  • Speaker, “USPTO Proceedings Panel,” Sedona Conference Patent Litigation Working Groups Annual Meeting (March 28, 2019) 
  • Moderator, “A New Day at the PTAB,” Unified Patents Ninth Annual Patent Administrative Law Conference (March 27, 2019)
  • Speaker, “Getting Your Patent Out of the PTAB: New Opportunities,” Practising Law Institute Webinar (March 18, 2019) 
  • Moderator, “PTAB Master Class,” PTAB Bar Association Annual Conference (March 13-15, 2019)
  • Speaker, "Patent Derivation, Trade Secret Misappropriation and Patent Ownership Disputes: Protecting Research in the Gig Economy,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (March 11, 2019)
  • Speaker, "How the PTAB’s Phillips Claim Construction Will Drive Patent Litigation Strategy in 2019,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (February 21, 2019)
  • Speaker, “Is Amending at the PTAB About to Become Even More Difficult?,” Practising Law Institute (PLI) Live Webinar (December 12, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Developments at the PTAB,” IAM Patent Law & Policy (November 13, 2018) 
  • Speaker, “Adapting to the New Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB),” Ropes & Gray Webinar (October 24, 2018)
  • Speaker, “USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2018,” Practising Law Institute (September 21, 2018) 
  • Speaker, “Indemnification, Joint Defense, RPI & Privity: Avoiding PTAB and Parallel Proceeding Pitfalls,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (September 17, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Evolving PTAB Trial Practice: Navigating Complex Procedural Rules,” Strafford Legal Webinar (September 12, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Patent Owners and the PTAB – Is There a Light at the End of the Tunnel,” Practising Law Institute (August 21, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Patent Trial & Appeal Board to Give Patent Owners the Last Word,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (August 20, 2018) 
  • Speaker, “USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2018,” Practising Law Institute (May 15, 2018) 
  • Co-chair, “USPTO Post-Grant Trials 2018: Change & Recalibration,” Practising Law Institute (May 15, 2018) 
  • Speaker, “Strategies for Litigating in the Changing Environment of PTAB,” Managing IP PTAB Forum in Silicon Valley (May 8, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Evolving Procedural Challenges Associated with AIA,” Managing IP PTAB Forum in New York (May 3, 2018)
  • Moderator, “Bio/Pharma Patent Deals & Dispute Resolution in the PTAB Era,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (May 2, 2018) 
  • Speaker, “Supreme Court Debrief: Oil States & SAS Institute: The Aftermath,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (May 1, 2018)
  • Speaker, “The Evolution of PTAB Practice,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (March 28, 2018)
  • Moderator, “The PTAB and Public Interest,” 8th Annual Patent & Administrative Law Conference (March 15, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Is the America Invents Act Weakening Licensing?” Managing Intellectual Property’s US Patent Forum 2018 (March 13, 2018)
  • Speaker, “AIA Trial Practice after WiFi One: PTAB Challenges and Opportunities,” PLI Briefing (February 23, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Roadblock PTAB: Litigation Strategies & IPR Antidotes,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (February 22, 2018)
  • Speaker, “Building Winning PTAB Appeals to the Federal Circuit,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (January 31, 2018) 
  • Speaker, “Ethics Issues in PTAB Proceedings,” AIPLA Webinar (December 13, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Functional Claiming After Mastermine Software v. Microsoft,” IPO Chat Channel (December 6, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Supreme Court Update: Oil States and SAS Institute,” Ropes & Gray Webinar (November 28, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Convincing the PTAB – Developing and Presenting Evidence in PTAB Proceedings,” The Power of PTAB: The New Authority in Patent Law Conference at the Chicago-Kent College of Law (October 20, 2017)
  • Speaker, “The Evolution of PTAB Trial Practice,” Ropes & Gray Teleconference (September 28, 2017) 
  • Speaker, “The Busiest Patent Court in the U.S. – The USPTO’s Patent Trial & Appeal Board,” PLI’s Post-Grant Patent Trials (September 25, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Evolving PTAB Trial Practice: Navigating Complex Procedural Rules,” Strafford Webinars (May 25, 2017)
  • Moderator, “Identifying the Best Strategies for you to Deal with the Administrative Changes,” Managing IP PTAB Forum 2017 (May 16, 2017)
  • Co-Panelist, “Parallel Proceedings: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly,” ACI’s 3rd Annual Post-Grant PTO Proceedings (May 11, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Adapting to PTAB Rule Changes & Complying with the Administrative Procedure ACT (APA),” MIP US Patent Forum 2017 (March 21, 2017)
  • Speaker, “The Evolution of PTAB Trial Practice – Just Because You Can, Doesn’t Mean You Should!,” 22nd Annual Intellectual Property Institute (March 10, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Impact of Recent Federal Circuit Decisions,” 12th Annual Advanced Patent Law Institute (March 9-10, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Mind Your Manners! Or, Ethics and Inequitable Conduct Before the PTAB,” PTAB Bar Association Inaugural Conference (March 3, 2017)
  • Speaker, “Top 3 Things You Need To Know: PTAB,” AIPLA Mid-Winter Meeting (February 3, 2017)
  • Speaker, Naples Patent Law Experts Conference (January 17, 2017)
  • Speaker, “After-Final Practice: Navigating Expanding PTO Options to Compact Patent Prosecution,” Strafford Webinar (November 22, 2016)
  • Speaker, “Four Years of the PTAB” and “A General Overview of the Patent Litigation Landscape,” IAM’s Patent Law & Policy: Courts, Congress, and the Monetisation Landscape (November 15, 2016)
  • Moderator, “Advanced Practice Before the PTAB; Institution, the New Battle Ground,” Institute for Law & Technology of the Center for American & International Law: Doubleheader PTAB Bench-Bar Program (October 18, 2016)
  •  Speaker, IPR-CBM Roundtable Discussion, The George Washington University Law School (October 7, 2016)
  • Speaker, “Leveraging PTAB Trial Records in Concurrent Litigation,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (September 21, 2016)
  • Speaker, “After-Final Practice: Navigating Expanding PTO Options to Compact Patent Prosecution,” Strafford Webinars (September 8, 2016)
  • Speaker, “The Tail That Wags the Dog: Leveraging the Administrative Procedure Act at the PTAB,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (July 27, 2016)
  • Speaker, “After Cuozzo from the U.S. Supreme Court,” Intellectual Property Owners’ Association Webinar Series (July 6, 2016)
  • Speaker, “PTAB & the Federal Circuit,” MIP PTAB Forum 2016 (May 12, 2016)
  • Speaker, “New PTAB Rules: Strategy, Insights and Outlook of Things to Come,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (April 13, 2016)
  • Speaker, PLI’s USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2016 (March 31, 2016)
  • Speaker, “Claim Construction During Post-Grant Review,” AIPLA Quarterly Journal First Annual Symposium (March 18, 2016)
  • Co-Panelist, “Parallel Proceedings: Tight Rope Balancing Act At The District Courts and PTAB,” ACI’s 2nd Annual Post-Grant PTO Proceedings (March 15, 2016)
  • Co-Chair and Panelist, USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2016 (March 14, 2016)
  • Speaker, “The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) & the PTAB,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (March 2, 2016)
  • Speaker, “Evolving PTAB Trial Practice: Navigating Complex Procedural Rules,” Strafford Legal Webinars (February 4, 2016)
  • Speaker, “Proactive Patent Procurement and Prosecution Strategies: Minimizing the Thread of Post-Grant Challenges,” Indianapolis Bar Association’s Lunch Lecture Series (January 27, 2016)
  • Speaker, PTAB Panel Discussion, McKinney Law School’s Distinguished Lecturer Series at Indianapolis University (January 26, 2016)
  • Speaker, “PTAB Year in Review,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (January 7, 2016)
  • Speaker, IAM’s Patent Law & Policy: Courts, Congress, and the Monetisation Landscape (November 17, 2015)
  • Speaker, “Is the IPR Process Too Restrictive – Can the Parties Really Litigate All the Necessary Issues?” 15th Annual Sedona Conference on Patent Litigation: Improving the Efficiency of Handling Patent Litigation (October 19-20, 2015)
  • Speaker, “Proactive Patent Procurement and Prosecution Strategies; Minimizing the Threat of Post-grant Challenges,” Strafford Webinar Series (October 8, 2015)
  • Speaker, “Leveraging Post-Grant Patent Proceedings Before the PTAB,” Strafford Webinar Series (July 9, 2015)
  • Speaker, “The PTAB’s Post-Grant Review Proceedings: A Review of the Evidence,” Duke Law Center for Innovation Policy (June 3, 2015)
  • Speaker, “Discovery in AIA Trials,” USPTO PTAB Boardside Chat (June 2, 2015)
  • Speaker, “Evolving PTAB Trial Practices: Navigating Complex Procedural Rules – Strategically Using Routine and Additional Discovery, Requests for Joinder, and Motions to Amend,” Strafford Webinars (December 15, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Business Method Patent Challenges after CLS Bank,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (November 19, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Preparing for War: PTAB Impact on Bio/Pharma Disputes,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (October 23, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Privies, Real-Parties-in-Interest & Joint Defense Scenarios at the PTAB,” PatentsPostGrant.com Webinar Series (September 24, 2014)
  • Speaker, “PTAB Past, Present, and Future: Post Grant Proceedings at the PTO,” Webinar (September 23, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Post-Grant Proofing Your Patent Portfolio: Prosecuting for the New Patent Assertion Landscape,” PatentsPostGrant.com (July 23, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Alice Corp v. CLS Bank International: Implications for Patent Practitioners and a Look at How The Supreme Court is Changing the Patent Law Landscape,” Oblon Spivak Webinar (July 14, 2014)
  • Speaker, PLI’s USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2014 (April 28, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Game Over: The Game Changing Impact of the Patent Trial Appeal Board on Non-Practicing Entities,” American Bar Association’s 29th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference (April 3, 2014)
  • Speaker, PLI Seminar: USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2014 (March 27, 2014)
  • Speaker, AIA and Bloomberg BNA Post-Grant Patent Practice Conference (February 19, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Proactive Patent Procurement & Prosecution Strategies: Minimizing the Threat of Post-Grant Challenges,” Strafford Webinars (February 13, 2014)
  • Speaker, “PTAB Roadblock to Patent Monetization,” PLI’s Patent Briefing Series (February 12, 2014)
  • Co-panelist, “Appeals from the PTAB: Laying the Groundwork for the Federal Circuit,” Intellectual Property Owner’s Association and IP Chat Channel (February 6, 2014)
  • Speaker, “Patent Trolls Under Fire; Strategies, Tactics & Legislation Impacting University Patents & Licensing,” Tech Transfer Central Webinar (October 22, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Post-Grant Proceedings & Pending Litigation: Fresenius v. Baxter,” Strafford Webinars (September 11, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Battling Patent Trolls: Leveraging New Executive Orders, AIA and Other Tools,” Strafford Webinars (July 31, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Post-Grant Patent Proceedings Before the PTAB,” Strafford Publications  (June 12, 2013)
  • Co-chair and Speaker, “Post-Grant Strategies & Tactics,” PLI’s USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2013 (April 15, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Covered Business Methods Post-Grant Review: The First Six Months,” Patent Administrative Law Symposium: Patent Subject-Matter Eligibility Today: Software Genomics and Business Methods  (April 12, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Patentability Trials of the AIA – The First 120 Days,” 28th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference (April 3, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Post-Grant Strategies and Tactics” PLI’s USPTO Post-Grant Trials 2012 in New York (March 27, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Post-Grant Strategies and Tactics,” PLI’s USPTO Post-Grant Patent Trials 2013 in Chicago (March 4, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Claim Construction Standards,” Advanced Patent Law Institute (January 24, 2013)
  • Speaker, “Benchmarking AIA and New Rulings,” CenterForce Conferences (November 13, 2012)
  • Speaker, 2012 Japan Intellectual Property Associate Conference (October 26, 2012)
  • Speaker, “New Post-Grant Patent Review & Patent Trolls: How Quicker Patent Reexamination Will Impact Infringement Litigation,” Washington Legal Foundation (August 2012)
  • Speaker, “American Invents Act,” Strafford Webinars (August 2, 2012)
  • Speaker, “Trial & Discovery Practice Before the New USPTO Patent & Appeal Board,” American Bar Association (August 2, 2012)
  • Speaker, “Intervening Rights in patent Litigation after the Federal Circuit’s Decision in Marine Polymer and Aspex Eyewear,” Intellectual Property Owner’s Association (April 18, 2012)
  • Speaker, “Inter Partes Review and Post-Grant Review: New Regime and New Strategies,” Latham & Watkins LLP (April 5, 2012)
  • Co-speaker, “Contested Proceedings Before the New Patent Trial and Appeal Board: Navigating PTO Practice Under the New Procedures,” Strafford Webinars (April 3, 2012)
  • Speaker, “Parallel Proceedings: Strategies for Preserving Causes of Action and Your Case in Chief in Multiple and Simultaneous Forums,” American Conference Institute (ACI) (March 26, 2012)
  • Speaker, “New Supplemental Examination: USPTO Outlines New Rules,” Strafford Webinars (February 14, 2012)
  • Speaker, “Post-Issuance Activities and Enforcement of Patents Under the America Invents Act,” American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) (January 12, 2012)
  • Speaker, “USPTO New Rules of Practice for Ex Parte Appeals: Change & Simplification for 2012,” Practising Law Institute (PLI) Live Webinar (January 9, 2012)
  • Speaker, “Patent Reexamination as a Litigation Tool,” 2011 Japan Intellectual Property Seminar (November 4, 2011)
  • Speaker, “USPTO Post-Grant Proceedings After New Patent Reform Law,” Strafford Webinars (September 28, 2011)
  • Speaker, “Patent Reissue: Benefits, limitations and Strategies,” Strafford Webinars (July 12, 2011)
  • Speaker, “Law Firm Media Professionals in DC – The Best in Blogs,” Crowell & Moring (June 20, 2011)
  • Speaker, “Streamlined Patent Reexamination Proceedings: Petition Practice Management,” USPTO Roundtable on Streamlining Patent Reexamination (June 1, 2011)
  • Speaker, “Choosing Between Ex Parte & Inter Partes Patent Reexamination,” USPTO (March 2011)
  • Speaker, “Strategic PTO Reexamination: A Defense Perspective (Part 1),” BNA IP Law Resource Center (February 18, 2011)
  • Speaker, “Reissue and Reexamination Strategies and Tactics with Concurrent Litigation 2011,” Practising Law Institute Seminar in New York (February 4, 2011)
  • Speaker, “Reissue and Reexamination Strategies and Tactics with Concurrent Litigation 2011,” Practising Law Institute Seminar in San Francisco (January 10, 2011)
  • Speaker, “Induced/Joint Patent Infringement in Global-Tech & Golden Hour,” Managing Intellectual Property (MIP) Webcast (December 20, 2010)
  • Speaker, “2010 Patent Reexamination/Reissue Year in Review,” LexisNexis Podcast (December 15, 2010)
  • Speaker, “US Patent Litigation,” Japanese Intellectual Property Association (October 27, 2010)
  • Speaker, “Inter Partes Reexamination – A Highly Effective Tool in the Litigator’s Toolbox,” 4th Annual Patent Law Institute (March 1, 2010)
  • Speaker, “Strategic Use of Merger in Post-Grant Proceedings (Reissue, Ex Parte, and Inter Partes Reexamination),” PLI’s Reissue and Reexamination Strategies & Tactics with Concurrent Litigation 2010 in New York (February 11, 2010)
  • Speaker, “Strategic Use of Merger in Post-Grant Proceedings (Reissue, Ex Parte, and Inter Partes Reexamination),” PLI’s Reissue and Reexamination Strategies & Tactics with Concurrent Litigation 2010 in San Francisco (January 11, 2010)
  • Speaker, “In re Bilskin and 35 U.S.C. § 101,” Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association (LAIPLA) and Pepperdine University (January 29, 2009)
  • Speaker, “Software Claims, A USPTO Perspective,” American Bar Association’s 2006 Summer IPL Conference (June 21, 2006)
  • Speaker, “Intellectual Property: What Engineers Need to Know About Patents,” Engineering Seminar at Temple University (November 18, 2005)
  • JD, Temple University Beasley School of Law, 1999
  • BS (Electrical Engineering), with honors, Temple University, 1993

Qualifications

  • District of Columbia, 2018
  • Pennsylvania, 1999
  • Virginia, 2004
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 1998

Court Admissions

  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
  • Supreme Court of Virginia
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 2019
  • Temple University Engineering – Top 50 Engineers (2023)
  • Managing Intellectual Property "Patent Star" (2022)
  • IAM Global Leaders: The World’s Leading IP Strategists (2022)
  • Managing IP Magazine: Americas “Outstanding Litigator PTAB” (2020) 
  • Lexology Legal Influencer – Dispute Resolution: US and IP: US (2018)
  • IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists (2018-2019)
  • Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
  • The Legal 500 US (2012, 2015, 2018)
  • Managing IP Magazine: Virginia “Litigator of the Year” (2017)
  • Managing IP Magazine: PTAB “Litigator of the Year” (2015)
  • Best Lawyers in America: Litigation–Intellectual Property (2015-2017, 2019-2023)
  • Best Lawyers in America: Patent Law (2023) 
  • The Best Lawyers in America - Lawyer of the Year (2021)
  • Super Lawyers (2020-2021)
  • IAM Patent 1000: The World's Leading Patent Practitioners
  • Managing IP Magazine: “IP Star” (2013-2018)
  • The National Law Journal: IP Trailblazers & Pioneers (2014)
  • Temple University: Gallery of Success (2013)

Patents Post-Grant

Award-winning insight into the latest developments and issues related to USPTO post-issuance proceedings from Scott McKeown, chair of Ropes & Gray’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board practice and the most active PTAB trial attorney in the United States.

Patents Post-Grant

IP Litigators Present at IPWatchdog Patent Litigation Masters 2023

IP litigation attorneys will present at the IPWatchdog Patent Litigation Masters 2023 program on May 15—17 at the IPWatchdog Studios in Ashburn, Virginia. The high-level interactive program will explore litigation in the most active federal district courts ...

View all

Ropes & Gray Launches Virtual Panel Discussion Series on 2020 Election Impact

Ropes & Gray launched a virtual panel discussion series called “Transition Tuesdays” exploring the potential impacts of the 2020 Presidential, Senate and House of Representatives elections. Regulatory changes that might emanate from Washington D.C. are likely to ...

View all

Cookie Settings