Mr. Curylo has drafted and prosecuted hundreds of utility patent applications in a variety of technologies, including image processing and content creation software, machine-learning platforms, digital advertising and marketing campaign tools, telecommunications devices, financial services data-processing platforms, and data storage technologies. His experience includes portfolio analysis and strategic planning, assistance with licensing and other commercial transaction agreements, and due diligence analysis of intellectual property issues in support of merger and acquisition negotiations.
Mr. Curylo has also represented companies in post-grant patent proceedings, including inter partes review and reexamination proceedings. He also helps clients monitor their competitors’ patenting and enforcement activities and works with clients to proactively develop strategies based on the client’s needs and priorities.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Curylo interned with Judge Richard W. Story of the Northern District of Georgia. During law school, he was on the editorial board of the University of Georgia Law Review, and he worked as an extern for the district attorney's office with the Western Judicial Circuit of the Tenth Superior Court District of Georgia. He also served as an intelligence officer with the Georgia Army National Guard, which included two years on active duty.
Mr. Curylo was recognized in 2017 and 2018 as a Georgia "Rising Star" in the area of Intellectual Property by Super Lawyers magazine.
Represented leading global provider of integrated energy management products regarding smart meters and the support of smart grids.
Defending United Airlines, U.S. Airways and Air Canada in the District of Delaware. CyberFone Systems LLC filed multiple actions in District of Delaware alleging infringement of form transactions that transmit data from a form presented to a user, including customer travel managements systems, which allegedly includes kiosks and network services platform. (Judge Robinson). Cyberfone Systems LLC v. Federal Express Corporation, et al., No. 11-cv-00834 (D. Del. filed Sept. 15, 2011).
Provides patent procurement and counseling services to Adobe Systems Incorporated, one of the largest and most diversified software companies in the world. The company offers creative, business and mobile software and services used by creative professionals, knowledge workers, consumers, original equipment manufacturer (OEM) partners and computer programmers. Much of the firm's work has focused on the software and services used to create, manage, deliver and engage with compelling content and experiences across multiple operating systems, devices and media. The firm works closely with the key technical and business personnel to identify and protect innovations with patent protection to achieve the company’s strategic corporate goals. The firm also counsels the company with respect to patent strategy.
Insights View All
University of Georgia School of Law, J.D. (2010)
Georgia Institute of Technology, B.S., Electrical Engineering (2004)
Georgia Supreme Court (2011)
Georgia Court of Appeals (2011)
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (2011)
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2011)
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.