G R O U P   S T A T S

  • Filed 3,657 patent applications in the U.S. and over 130 countries in 2014
  • 88% of attorneys and technology specialists have science or engineering degrees
  • 66% have advanced degrees; 50% have PHDs or MDs
  • Provide full range of patent services, from patent drafting, to prior art searches; to international filing strategies, to infringement opinions, to enforcement/defense of patent rights

We have been a patent powerhouse for nearly nine decades. Clients—including Nobel Prize winners, Fortune 500 companies, technology startups, and leading research universities—turn to us to help them protect their inventions, products, and services and build value in a competitive marketplace.

Here’s why they choose Wolf Greenfield and what they say about us:

Experience counts. Our experience before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, combined with our deep technical expertise, produce strong patents with broad protection and claims that can be defended if litigation is threatened. When it’s a do-or-die situation, or clients have complex or technically challenging matters, they come to us.

Client testimonial:
"I want to use Wolf Greenfield when it is one of our iconic products and is a big revenue driver and it is critical to get it right …They are the go-to firm for those critical pieces that are going to be huge for our business."

Practical solutions. We look at each situation as it relates to a client’s business strategy and adapt our advice accordingly to provide clients with the practical input and judgment required for serious decision-making.

Client testimonial:
"They have worked with us for many years and ask a lot of questions. That allows them to give us practical advice tailored to our business objectives and to operate more efficiently because they understand what we really need."

Superlative service. We strive to exceed our clients’ expectations when it comes to responsiveness, accessibility, and personal attention, often providing off-the-clock assistance and education to support their strategic goals.

Client testimonial:
"It is everything you want in a relationship, and the response times are the role model for firms. We reference Wolf Greenfield as the standard when we talk about what we expect from law firms."

Stable teams. Clients appreciate the remarkable degree of stability among our people because they can rely on the consistency of a solid team to keep pace with their growth.

Client testimonial:
"They have been a fantastic partner. They are thoughtful and responsive, and they out-lawyer anyone we have been up against. Also, they have had the same people there working for us for a long time."

Structured to succeed globally. Our legal support staff includes paralegals, search specialists, international filing specialists, and docketing and research professionals skilled at managing patent portfolios, and our client portal gives clients 24/7 access to their matter-level patent portfolio data. Working with select international patent firms in over 130 countries, we can choose the right international partner for our clients’ needs and budgets.

Client testimonial:
"Compared to other firms, Wolf Greenfield has an excellent infrastructure to support our work. The firm is built to do high volumes of patent work and that is good for us."
  • Our client started with a potentially dominant set of broad patent applications. They faced a competitor who filed over 30 narrower claims in an effort to push theirs through the PTO more quickly and establish market dominance. We developed an aggressive strategy using interference rules and meeting with PTO executives to consolidate the examiners, who were looking at all patents involved. There was an abrupt halt of patents issued to the competitor. Our client’s claims and IP position prevailed.
  • A start-up biotechnology client needed to convert a self-written provisional application into full utility filings in the U.S. and abroad. Our team of biotech, chemistry, and materials experts worked with the client to craft a comprehensive application suitable for filing in all geographies. This application serves as the foundation of the client’s business plan. The client has successfully presented its IP strategy to investors and potential business partners.
  • A semiconductor client was at risk because its portfolio was small and operating in a competitive market with aggressive companies. We drafted a patent policy, educated business and technical personnel on patent issues, and helped the client develop a significant patent portfolio. Our client has been able to reach cross-licensing deals with competitors and stay out of litigation.
  • A handful of high-ranking employees left our client, started a competing explosives detection company, and filed patents they invented while employed by our client. We were required to seek recourse through the PTO, where we filed continuations to prove the client owned and showed patentability of claims the competitor contended were not patentable. The efforts forced a multi-million dollar settlement in favor of our client, fully resolving all issues between the parties.
  • A new client thought it had a dominant IP position based on patents filed years earlier. We were asked to do diligence and a freedom-to-operate opinion respecting a lead product. We uncovered a series of prior art documents that would have undermined the client’s position in the eyes of an investor. The client bought the competitor’s IP, took a new position in-line with the discovered prior art and yielded a strong valuation and investment.
  • Our client worked in a competitive industry with high potential for infringement and litigation threats from a particular competitor. We interpreted the scope of the competitor's patent claims and worked to change the design of our client's product to avoid infringement. We also discovered they owned a European patent with broad claims. We successfully opposed the patent and the competitor was left with much narrower claims that posed no infringement risk to our client.
  • An individual inventor developed a prototype carousel for kitchen storage containers and needed rock-solid IP protection to approach infomercial promoters. We obtained patents broad enough to cover the product and future products or extensions. We assisted in negotiations in an industry known for copycat products. Our client’s product is one of the most successful infomercial products in history. Over six million units were sold in the first six months.
  • Our client, a biotechnology company, had a case stuck in suspension at the USPTO for many years due to a potential interference with a competitor. We developed a prosecution strategy that moved the case out of suspension, avoided an interference, and obtained a patent that dominated the competitor. Our client is now moving along the development pipeline with technology, and a secure commercialization strategy.
  • A technology company was being sold to a global printing inks and coatings company. They needed to prepare all the IP diligence reports and organize the IP portfolio to best position the business. Having prepared and prosecuted their IP, we were in a unique position to comment on it and facilitated transfer of the portfolio. Our client sold the portfolio and business for the asking price and the manufacturing company retained continuity with retaining us.
  • Our client owned patented inspection equipment which they sought to commercialize in a highly competitive market, and they needed to ensure clearance. We discovered an earlier patent owned by their top competitor that potentially covered our client's proposed product. The competitor was in litigation with another company over the same patent. The client successfully avoided infringement of any competitors and earned over $500K in sales that year.

Recent Articles:

May 22, 2015
"Saving Patents from Inter Partes Review with Reissue" by Edmund J. Walsh and Stuart V.C. Duncan Smith
Patent owners anticipating an IPR challenge may find refuge in the amendment options available through reissue. Read more

April 15, 2015
"Don't Forget To Request PTAB Authorization For Motions" by Michael T. Siekman and Chelsea A. Loughran
When filing motions, practitioners are often quite surprised to learn that essentially all motions require authorization from the board. Read more

April 8, 2015
"Diagnostic patenting since Myriad: an update" by Patrick R. H. Waller and Daniel W. Young
Stakeholders shouldn’t conclude that nothing is patent eligible in the diagnostic space. Read more

April 3, 2015
"PTAB Surprises Some by Using Its Standard Operating Procedures to Assert Control of Its Case Law" by Michael T. Siekman and Oona M. Johnstone
It is less well-known that the Board’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), previously applied to contested cases, are also applicable to AIA post-grant proceedings. Read more

March 31, 2015
"Establishing non-infringement and other creative uses of inter partes review" by Michael N. Rader
IPR proceedings can also be used creatively, however, to achieve results beyond their statutory mandate. Read more

January 28, 2015
"Looking Behind The Different Invalidation Rates Of Oppositions And IPRs" by Janice A. Vatland and Y. Jenny Chen
Current statistics indicate a higher invalidation rate for IPRs as compared to EPO oppositions. Read more

December 22, 2014
"Recent Cases Warn Of Dangers Of Trying For Second Bite At The IPR Apple" by John L. Strand and Stuart V.C. Duncan Smith
Recent PTAB decisions demonstrate limits to strategy of filing IPR petition quickly and correcting deficiencies or mistakes with second petition. Read more

December 8, 2014
"One Bite At The Apple: PTAB Closes IPR Joinder Loophole" by John L. Strand and W. Brett Morrison 

Recent decisions may signal shift in PTAB’s interpretation of IPR joinder provision. Read more

September 17, 2014
"Never underestimate the power of a post-grant proceeding" by Hunter Keeton
In ePlus, Inc. v. Lawson Software, Inc., the Federal Circuit extended the logic from three earlier cases which had found that a patent determined to be valid and infringed can still be invalidated by a later PTO reexamination. Read more

September 8, 2014
"No, 'Alice' Wasn't a 'Death Knell' for Software Patents" by Ling Cheung Hughes and James H. Morris
In the Supreme Court's Alice decision, it solidly upheld patent eligibility of computer-implemented inventions and continued to refuse to recognize separate exception for business methods. Read more

July 10, 2014
"Assignor Estoppel Not a Defense in
Inter Partes Review"
by Nathan Speed
To read full text of article, log in to Intellectual Property Today.

To view older publications, go to Publications

Federal Circuit Props Door Open for Doctrine of Equivalents

Federal Circuit Addresses When Activities are Undertaken “for the U.S.” Under 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a)

Federal Circuit Clarifies Scope of § 271(f)(1), Emphasizes Full-Scope Enablement

The IP Picture for iPS Cells

Limiting Patent Infringement Damages for Complex, Multi-Featured Products

For older news items, please go to News & Events.

Recent News

July 31, 2015

Oona Johnstone interviewed by ASHG for Featured Chat Fridays

June 16, 2015

IAM Patent 1000 Recognizes Wolf Greenfield

May 18, 2015

Managing IP Magazine Recognizes Wolf Greenfield

April 2, 2015

A.J. Tibbetts explains why you should protect your app idea

February 27, 2015

Law360 quotes Charlie Steenburg on uptick in pharma patent litigation

December 16, 2014

Chelsea Loughran talks about CRISPR in Xconomy

November 17, 2014

Law360 quotes A.J. Tibbetts on effects of Alice on ad patent ruling

October 20, 2014

20 Wolf Greenfield Lawyers Named to 2014 Massachusetts Rising Stars List

October 20, 2014

22 Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Named to 2014 Massachusetts Super Lawyers List

September 26, 2014

Pat Granahan comments on the battle to own CRISPR

July 30, 2014

A.J. Tibbetts quoted in Technology Transfer Tactics

July 8, 2014

Pat Granahan and Chelsea Loughran quoted on CRISPR-Cas in Nature Biotechnology

July 2, 2014

James Morris quoted by Mass Lawyers Weekly on Supreme Court's IP decisions

June 23, 2014

Patrick Waller interviewed by Radio Entrepreneurs

June 19, 2014

James Morris quoted by Law360 on Alice v. CLS Bank

June 19, 2014

James Morris quoted by Upstart Business Journal on Alice v. CLS Bank

June 18, 2014

GenomeWeb quotes Chelsea Loughran on IP landscape surrounding CRISPR-Cas9

May 22, 2014

Wolf Greenfield Recognized by Managing IP Magazine

April 17, 2014

Chelsea Loughran quoted in The Scientist on first awarded CRISPR-Cas9 patent

April 16, 2014

Chelsea Loughran quoted in MIT Tech Review on first awarded patent for engineered CRISPR-Cas9 system

March 5, 2014

Doug Wolf featured as the Entrepreneur.com expert for the month of March

January 2, 2014

Dyax Corp Prevails at PTAB by Proving 11 Months of Diligence


G R O U P   S T A T S

  • Filed 3,657 patent applications in the U.S. and over 130 countries in 2014
  • 88% of attorneys and technology specialists have science or engineering degrees
  • 66% have advanced degrees; 50% have PHDs or MDs
  • Provide full range of patent services, from patent drafting, to prior art searches; to international filing strategies, to infringement opinions, to enforcement/defense of patent rights

We have been a patent powerhouse for nearly nine decades. Clients—including Nobel Prize winners, Fortune 500 companies, technology startups, and leading research universities—turn to us to help them protect their inventions, products, and services and build value in a competitive marketplace.

Here’s why they choose Wolf Greenfield and what they say about us:

Experience counts. Our experience before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, combined with our deep technical expertise, produce strong patents with broad protection and claims that can be defended if litigation is threatened. When it’s a do-or-die situation, or clients have complex or technically challenging matters, they come to us.

Client testimonial:
"I want to use Wolf Greenfield when it is one of our iconic products and is a big revenue driver and it is critical to get it right …They are the go-to firm for those critical pieces that are going to be huge for our business."

Practical solutions. We look at each situation as it relates to a client’s business strategy and adapt our advice accordingly to provide clients with the practical input and judgment required for serious decision-making.

Client testimonial:
"They have worked with us for many years and ask a lot of questions. That allows them to give us practical advice tailored to our business objectives and to operate more efficiently because they understand what we really need."

Superlative service. We strive to exceed our clients’ expectations when it comes to responsiveness, accessibility, and personal attention, often providing off-the-clock assistance and education to support their strategic goals.

Client testimonial:
"It is everything you want in a relationship, and the response times are the role model for firms. We reference Wolf Greenfield as the standard when we talk about what we expect from law firms."

Stable teams. Clients appreciate the remarkable degree of stability among our people because they can rely on the consistency of a solid team to keep pace with their growth.

Client testimonial:
"They have been a fantastic partner. They are thoughtful and responsive, and they out-lawyer anyone we have been up against. Also, they have had the same people there working for us for a long time."

Structured to succeed globally. Our legal support staff includes paralegals, search specialists, international filing specialists, and docketing and research professionals skilled at managing patent portfolios, and our client portal gives clients 24/7 access to their matter-level patent portfolio data. Working with select international patent firms in over 130 countries, we can choose the right international partner for our clients’ needs and budgets.

Client testimonial:
"Compared to other firms, Wolf Greenfield has an excellent infrastructure to support our work. The firm is built to do high volumes of patent work and that is good for us."
  • Our client started with a potentially dominant set of broad patent applications. They faced a competitor who filed over 30 narrower claims in an effort to push theirs through the PTO more quickly and establish market dominance. We developed an aggressive strategy using interference rules and meeting with PTO executives to consolidate the examiners, who were looking at all patents involved. There was an abrupt halt of patents issued to the competitor. Our client’s claims and IP position prevailed.
  • A start-up biotechnology client needed to convert a self-written provisional application into full utility filings in the U.S. and abroad. Our team of biotech, chemistry, and materials experts worked with the client to craft a comprehensive application suitable for filing in all geographies. This application serves as the foundation of the client’s business plan. The client has successfully presented its IP strategy to investors and potential business partners.
  • A semiconductor client was at risk because its portfolio was small and operating in a competitive market with aggressive companies. We drafted a patent policy, educated business and technical personnel on patent issues, and helped the client develop a significant patent portfolio. Our client has been able to reach cross-licensing deals with competitors and stay out of litigation.
  • A handful of high-ranking employees left our client, started a competing explosives detection company, and filed patents they invented while employed by our client. We were required to seek recourse through the PTO, where we filed continuations to prove the client owned and showed patentability of claims the competitor contended were not patentable. The efforts forced a multi-million dollar settlement in favor of our client, fully resolving all issues between the parties.
  • A new client thought it had a dominant IP position based on patents filed years earlier. We were asked to do diligence and a freedom-to-operate opinion respecting a lead product. We uncovered a series of prior art documents that would have undermined the client’s position in the eyes of an investor. The client bought the competitor’s IP, took a new position in-line with the discovered prior art and yielded a strong valuation and investment.
  • Our client worked in a competitive industry with high potential for infringement and litigation threats from a particular competitor. We interpreted the scope of the competitor's patent claims and worked to change the design of our client's product to avoid infringement. We also discovered they owned a European patent with broad claims. We successfully opposed the patent and the competitor was left with much narrower claims that posed no infringement risk to our client.
  • An individual inventor developed a prototype carousel for kitchen storage containers and needed rock-solid IP protection to approach infomercial promoters. We obtained patents broad enough to cover the product and future products or extensions. We assisted in negotiations in an industry known for copycat products. Our client’s product is one of the most successful infomercial products in history. Over six million units were sold in the first six months.
  • Our client, a biotechnology company, had a case stuck in suspension at the USPTO for many years due to a potential interference with a competitor. We developed a prosecution strategy that moved the case out of suspension, avoided an interference, and obtained a patent that dominated the competitor. Our client is now moving along the development pipeline with technology, and a secure commercialization strategy.
  • A technology company was being sold to a global printing inks and coatings company. They needed to prepare all the IP diligence reports and organize the IP portfolio to best position the business. Having prepared and prosecuted their IP, we were in a unique position to comment on it and facilitated transfer of the portfolio. Our client sold the portfolio and business for the asking price and the manufacturing company retained continuity with retaining us.
  • Our client owned patented inspection equipment which they sought to commercialize in a highly competitive market, and they needed to ensure clearance. We discovered an earlier patent owned by their top competitor that potentially covered our client's proposed product. The competitor was in litigation with another company over the same patent. The client successfully avoided infringement of any competitors and earned over $500K in sales that year.

Recent Articles:

May 22, 2015
"Saving Patents from Inter Partes Review with Reissue" by Edmund J. Walsh and Stuart V.C. Duncan Smith
Patent owners anticipating an IPR challenge may find refuge in the amendment options available through reissue. Read more

April 15, 2015
"Don't Forget To Request PTAB Authorization For Motions" by Michael T. Siekman and Chelsea A. Loughran
When filing motions, practitioners are often quite surprised to learn that essentially all motions require authorization from the board. Read more

April 8, 2015
"Diagnostic patenting since Myriad: an update" by Patrick R. H. Waller and Daniel W. Young
Stakeholders shouldn’t conclude that nothing is patent eligible in the diagnostic space. Read more

April 3, 2015
"PTAB Surprises Some by Using Its Standard Operating Procedures to Assert Control of Its Case Law" by Michael T. Siekman and Oona M. Johnstone
It is less well-known that the Board’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), previously applied to contested cases, are also applicable to AIA post-grant proceedings. Read more

March 31, 2015
"Establishing non-infringement and other creative uses of inter partes review" by Michael N. Rader
IPR proceedings can also be used creatively, however, to achieve results beyond their statutory mandate. Read more

January 28, 2015
"Looking Behind The Different Invalidation Rates Of Oppositions And IPRs" by Janice A. Vatland and Y. Jenny Chen
Current statistics indicate a higher invalidation rate for IPRs as compared to EPO oppositions. Read more

December 22, 2014
"Recent Cases Warn Of Dangers Of Trying For Second Bite At The IPR Apple" by John L. Strand and Stuart V.C. Duncan Smith
Recent PTAB decisions demonstrate limits to strategy of filing IPR petition quickly and correcting deficiencies or mistakes with second petition. Read more

December 8, 2014
"One Bite At The Apple: PTAB Closes IPR Joinder Loophole" by John L. Strand and W. Brett Morrison 

Recent decisions may signal shift in PTAB’s interpretation of IPR joinder provision. Read more

September 17, 2014
"Never underestimate the power of a post-grant proceeding" by Hunter Keeton
In ePlus, Inc. v. Lawson Software, Inc., the Federal Circuit extended the logic from three earlier cases which had found that a patent determined to be valid and infringed can still be invalidated by a later PTO reexamination. Read more

September 8, 2014
"No, 'Alice' Wasn't a 'Death Knell' for Software Patents" by Ling Cheung Hughes and James H. Morris
In the Supreme Court's Alice decision, it solidly upheld patent eligibility of computer-implemented inventions and continued to refuse to recognize separate exception for business methods. Read more

July 10, 2014
"Assignor Estoppel Not a Defense in
Inter Partes Review"
by Nathan Speed
To read full text of article, log in to Intellectual Property Today.

To view older publications, go to Publications

Federal Circuit Props Door Open for Doctrine of Equivalents

Federal Circuit Addresses When Activities are Undertaken “for the U.S.” Under 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a)

Federal Circuit Clarifies Scope of § 271(f)(1), Emphasizes Full-Scope Enablement

The IP Picture for iPS Cells

Limiting Patent Infringement Damages for Complex, Multi-Featured Products

For older news items, please go to News & Events.

Recent News

July 31, 2015

Oona Johnstone interviewed by ASHG for Featured Chat Fridays

June 16, 2015

IAM Patent 1000 Recognizes Wolf Greenfield

May 18, 2015

Managing IP Magazine Recognizes Wolf Greenfield

April 2, 2015

A.J. Tibbetts explains why you should protect your app idea

February 27, 2015

Law360 quotes Charlie Steenburg on uptick in pharma patent litigation

December 16, 2014

Chelsea Loughran talks about CRISPR in Xconomy

November 17, 2014

Law360 quotes A.J. Tibbetts on effects of Alice on ad patent ruling

October 20, 2014

20 Wolf Greenfield Lawyers Named to 2014 Massachusetts Rising Stars List

October 20, 2014

22 Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Named to 2014 Massachusetts Super Lawyers List

September 26, 2014

Pat Granahan comments on the battle to own CRISPR

July 30, 2014

A.J. Tibbetts quoted in Technology Transfer Tactics

July 8, 2014

Pat Granahan and Chelsea Loughran quoted on CRISPR-Cas in Nature Biotechnology

July 2, 2014

James Morris quoted by Mass Lawyers Weekly on Supreme Court's IP decisions

June 23, 2014

Patrick Waller interviewed by Radio Entrepreneurs

June 19, 2014

James Morris quoted by Law360 on Alice v. CLS Bank

June 19, 2014

James Morris quoted by Upstart Business Journal on Alice v. CLS Bank

June 18, 2014

GenomeWeb quotes Chelsea Loughran on IP landscape surrounding CRISPR-Cas9

May 22, 2014

Wolf Greenfield Recognized by Managing IP Magazine

April 17, 2014

Chelsea Loughran quoted in The Scientist on first awarded CRISPR-Cas9 patent

April 16, 2014

Chelsea Loughran quoted in MIT Tech Review on first awarded patent for engineered CRISPR-Cas9 system

March 5, 2014

Doug Wolf featured as the Entrepreneur.com expert for the month of March

January 2, 2014

Dyax Corp Prevails at PTAB by Proving 11 Months of Diligence