Keith Fredlake is a registered patent attorney who focuses his practice on intellectual property matters, including drafting and prosecuting patent applications, primarily in the chemical and life sciences industry including chemistry, chemical engineering, oil & gas-petrochemicals, medical devices and pharmaceuticals. Mr. Fredlake works with clients on design patents and he also counsels clients on issues regarding the patentability of inventions, patent rights in foreign countries, and the infringement and validity of U.S. patents.
Mr. Fredlake’s patent practice includes performing portfolio review for clients, including freedom-to-operate, invalidity, patentability and opposition searches. He is also experienced in the preparation of invalidity and non-infringement options for utility and design patents. In addition, Mr. Fredlake has significant experience in conducting trademark clearances, registering trademarks, negotiations and licensing, and adversarial proceedings before the U.S. Trademark and Appeal Board and Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Fredlake worked as a shareholder a Northern Virginia office of an intellectual property law firm where his areas of practice included patents, opinions and searching. Previously, Mr. Fredlake was an associate in the Washington, D.C. office of an international law firm.
Mr. Fredlake was recommended by Legal 500 US in 2015 for Patent Prosecution.
Counsel for patentee Celanese in five inter partes review petitions filed by competitor Daicel challenging validity of Celanese patents related to industrial acetic acid production. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board initially ruled in favor of client Celanese, completely denying all five petitions, although requests for rehearing subsequently resulted in the institution of 3 of the 5 IPRs. In June of 2016, the PTAB issued final written decisions in the three IPRs, finding for patent owner Celanese and affirming all instituted claims as not unpatentable.
United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Case Numbers IPR2014-01514, IPR2014-01515, IPR2015-000170, IPR2015-00171 and IPR2015-00173.
Insights View All
American University, J.D. (2002)
Western State College of Colorado, B.A., Political Science (1998)
District of Columbia (2008)
Colorado (inactive) (2002)
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2005)
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
Licensing Executive Society, CEEM Member
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.