Scott Daniels

Scott Daniels represents clients as lead-counsel in litigation matters in District Courts and at the U.S. International Trade Commission. He participates in post-grant review and ex parte reexamination proceedings at the U.S. Patent Office. He also counsels clients by preparing infringement and validity opinions.

Mr. Daniels has been a frequent blogger, primarily concerning post-grant proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He is relied upon or quoted by publications, including Bloomberg, Reuters, IP360, Patently-O, Docket Navigator and Foss Patents. He has also been a frequent lecturer and author on USPTO post-grant and ITC issues. Additionally, Mr. Daniels was an Attorney in the early 1980s in the General Counsel’s Office of the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Publications by Mr. Daniels include:

• Masimo v Apple Watch import ban fiasco tops 2023 developments in USITC, 2.6.24
• USPTO director takes greater control of agency’s post-grant proceedings, 10.2.23
• Know these US International Trade Commission legal developments from 2023’s first half,  6.16.23
• Two Recent Court Decisions Help Overcome Enablement Rejections, 6.8.23
• Walking the tightrope between infringement notice and declaratory judgment risk, 4.5.23
• Shielding patent assertions against early-filed Section 101 challenges, 11.12.22
• Seven steps to secure and safeguard US patents for AI-assisted inventions, 9.20.22
• Federal Circuit Friendly To Negative Claim Limitations, But Not In This Case, 7.18.22
• Five tips for CIPOs getting outside legal opinions on patent threats in the wake of the CAFC’s Roche ruling, 5.17.22
• Estoppels & Stays: Recent Developments in Inter Partes Review Practice, AILPA Annual Meeting, 10.20
• It All Begins with Claim Construction, CAFC Alert, 2.15.2019
• Whose Burden Is It?, CAFC Alert, 9.19.2018
• To Combine or not to Combine, CAFC Alert, 4.16.2018
• When Is Prior Art Analogous?, CAFC Alert, 11.29.2017
• When is Evidence of Written Description Too Late?, CAFC Alert, 10.24.2017
• Federal Circuit Finds Claimed Invention Obvious, Reversing Trial Judge & Jury, CAFC Alert, 8.27.2015
• CAFC Finds Proof of Damages Inadequate , CAFC Alert, 3.31.2015
• EPOS Technologies v. Pegasus Technologies, CAFC Alert, 9.10.2014
• “There Must Be A Clear and Compelling Reason To Construe A Claim Term In A Way Other Than Its Ordinary Meaning”, CAFC Alert,  3.19.2014
• “CAFC Reverses Trial Court’s Indefiniteness Ruling”, CAFC Alert, 5.9.2013
• In re Jeffrey Hubbell: An Inventor Changing Jobs Creates Double Patenting Problem, IPWatchdog, 3.15.2013
• “Elimination of False Marketing Actions Does Not Violate the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution”, CAFC Alert, 1.3.2013
• “CAFC Does Not Find Means-Plus-Function in a ‘Height Adjustment Mechanism'”, CAFC Alert, 11.7.2012
• “Will the Marine Polymer Expansion of Intervening Rights Be Reversed?” CAFC Alert, 1.30.2012
• “Medtronic’s New Intervening Rights Assertion Falls Short For Now”, USPTO Litigation Alert, 12.1.2011
• “Attacking Patents Already Adjudicated To Be Valid”, USPTO Litigation Alert, 12.1.2011
• “PTO Board Reverses Rejection Of Claim For Being Broadened In Reexamination”, USPTO Litigation Alert, 12.1.2011
• “A Pointer From Reexamination Practice”, USPTO Litigation Alert, 12.1.2011
• “Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership et al.”, CAFC Alert, 6.24.2011
• “CAFC Creates New Inequitable Conduct Standard in Therasense v. Becton, Dickinson”, CAFC Alert, 6.3.2011
• “Major Funai TV Patent, Once Held Valid by CAFC, Brought Down in Reexamination”, IPWatchdog, 11.3.2010
• “CAFC Finds HFC Patent Valid: Honeywell Was Not “Another Inventor” under § 102(g)(2)”, PLI Patent Law Practice Center, 10.15.2010
• “Microsoft Files Another Reexam Against $290 Million i4i Patent”, IPWatchdog, 9.4.2010
• CAFC Rules For False Marking Plaintiff In Stauffer Case, PLI Patent Law Practice Center, 8.31.2010
• “Do You Have What It Takes to Bring Suit at the ITC? — Standing and the ITC’s Domestic Industry Requirement”, IPWatchdog (with Merritt Blakeslee), 8.24.2010
• “Rambus Wins Limited Exclusion Order at ITC against NVIDIA, despite Pending Reexaminations”, PLI Patent Law Practice Center, 8.16.2010
• “Trial Judge Terminates Injunction After PTO Issues Advisory Action in Reexamination”, IPWatchdog, 7.26.2010
• “The Application of KSR to Pharmaceutical Cases”, Patent, Vol. 61, 5.1.2008
• “Why Wait for Oppositions?” (with Kate Addison) IDEA, vol. 47, 1.1.2007
• “Recent CAFC Trends” JIPA Program, 1.1.2005
• “Essentials of Drafting U.S. Patent Specifications and Claims”, 1.1.2000
• “Novelty and Nonobviousness” NGB Program, 1.1.1997
• “Protecting U.S. Intellectual Property Rights at the ITC”, Hatsumei Kokai, 1.1.1989

Lectures by Mr. Daniels include:

• “Patent Reexamination and Inter Partes Review”, Practicing Law Institute, October 2013
• “Post Grant Proceedings: The Year in Review”, The Intellectual Property Association of Chicago, November 2013
• “Versata v. SAP and Fresenius v. Baxter: Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel in Post-grant Proceedings and Concurrent Li”, IPO Webinar, August 2013
• Japan Patent Attorneys Association, 2007
• JIPA Mock Trial 2013, 2011, 2009, 2007, 2005, 2003, 2000, 1998, 1996
• “Expert Witnesses”, Intellectual Property Institute of Canada, 2004
• “ITC Practice”, Japan Intellectual Property Association, 1989-2003