Will is an intellectual property litigator with experience representing clients in Federal District Courts, before the Patent Trademark and Appeal Board, and before the U.S. International Trade Commission. He is also a member of teams arguing before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Will represents clients in matters involving a wide range of technologies involving biology, chemistry, mechanical and medical devices, and high tech.
Will’s experience includes litigating intellectual property cases through pre-litigation investigation, litigation, and appeal. He has handled patent, trademark, and trade secret litigation matters involving biotechnology and high tech (including drugs, devices, diagnostics, molecular and cellular engineering, HDMI technology, digital communication systems, etc.). He also has been a key member of successful trial teams before the International Trade Commission and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (IPRs). Will also maintains a pro bono practice representing and counseling clients in matters related to immigration
While earning his undergraduate degree, Will was a member of a graduate research group focused on using single molecule fluorescence techniques to study RNA. In 2013, he received the James E. Harris Scholarship to fund his summer research. During law school, Will was a managing editor of the American Journal of Law & Medicine and was selected to represent BU Law in the Oxford International Intellectual Property Moot competition.
Will is an intellectual property litigator with experience representing clients in Federal District Courts, before the Patent Trademark and Appeal Board, and before the U.S. International Trade Commission. He is also a member of teams arguing before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Will represents clients in matters involving a wide range of technologies involving biology, chemistry, mechanical and medical devices, and high tech.
Experience
Federal Circuit Appeals
- Truveris, Inc. v. SkySail Concepts, LLC, No. 23-1024 (Fed. Cir.): Represented Defendant-Appellee SkySail in an appeal involving a patent claiming a computer-implemented system and method that manages the selection of prescription drug plans. The Federal Circuit issued a per curiam summary affirmance of the District Court’s order granting SkySail’s motion to dismiss for lack of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
- Eyenovia, Inc. v. Sydnexis, Inc., 2023-2402, -2403, -2411 (Fed. Cir.): Representing Appellee Eyenovia in an appeal from IPRs invalidating all challenged claims of patents claiming ophthalmic compositions for the treatment of myopia.
International Trade Commission
- Certain Human Milk Oligosaccharides and Methods of Producing the Same (337-TA-1120): Represented Glycosyn LLC as complainant before the ITC against respondent Jennewein Biotechnologies GmbH, a large global competitor. The complaint alleged unlawful and unauthorized importation and production and/or manufacture of 2'-fucosyllactose oligosaccharides that directly infringe one or more claims of Glycosyn’s U.S. Patent No. 9,453,230. Following oral hearing in May 2019, the Administrative Law Judge issued an Initial Determination finding that Jennewein had infringed claims of Glycosyn’s patent and recommended that a limited exclusion order issue, including a certification provision with heightened requirement.
District Court
- Nanoco Technologies Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., No. 20-00038 (E.D. Tex.): Represented British nanotechnology company Nanoco Technologies, Ltd., a world leader in the development and manufacture of cadmium-free quantum dots and other nanomaterials, in a patent infringement case involving the synthesis of quantum dots, and use of quantum dot film resins in electronic display devices. The firm secured a $150 million settlement for the client, which put an end to all global litigation between Nanoco and Samsung.
- SRAM, LLC v. Princeton Carbon Works Inc., 9:21-cv-80581 (S.D. Fla): Obtained a significant and complete defense verdict for client Princeton CarbonWorks, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Princeton CarbonWorks is a Connecticut-based bicycle wheel maker that was accused of infringing two patents by competitor and industry giant SRAM, LLC. This was a “bet-the-company” dispute for Princeton CarbonWorks that culminated in a two-week trial in Miami, Florida. At the conclusion of the trial, a nine-person jury reached a verdict of no infringement and no damages in favor of Princeton CarbonWorks.
- SoClean, Inc. v. Sunset Healthcare Solutions, Inc., No. 21-10131 and 20-10351 (D. Mass.): Counsel to plaintiff in patent and trademark infringement actions involving devices for sanitizing CPAP machines; successfully obtained preliminary injunction on trademark claims (affirmed on appeal).
Inter Partes Reviews
- Affordable Wire Management, LLC v. Cambria County Association for the Blind and Handicapped, Inc., IPR2024-00139, -00178: Representing patent challenger in IPRs involving patents claiming systems for grounding and organizing electrical cables in solar arrays. Institution granted in April and May 2024, oral arguments scheduled for January and February 2025.
- LG Electronics, Inc. v. Constellation Designs, LLC, IPR2023-00319: Represented patent owner Constellation Designs in an IPR involving patents claiming digital communication systems that use unequally spaced symbol constellations. Obtained Final Written decision finding that the challenged claims were not unpatentable.
- Eyenovia, Inc. v. Sydnexis, Inc., IPR2022-00384, -00414, -00415: Represented patent challenger Eyenovia in IPRs involving patents claiming ophthalmic compositions for the treatment of myopia. Obtained Final Written decisions invalidating all challenged claims (totaling 50 claims) for all three challenged patents.
viewpoints
The Trademark Modernization Act Establishes New Trademark Cancellation Procedures
January 12, 2021 | Blog | By Michael Graif , Williams Dixon
News & Press
Defending AI, Machine Learning Patents In Life Sciences
October 1, 2024
Intellectual Property Chair Michael Renaud and Associates Meena Seralathan, Simone Yhap, and Williams Dixon recently wrote an article for Law360 focused on protecting artificial intelligence and machine learning patents in the life sciences industry following the US Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Alice v. CLS Bank.