Overview

Justin Krieger is a registered patent attorney who focuses on client counseling, patent office and district court litigation, and patent prosecution. Mr. Krieger’s technical focus includes chemistry, chemical engineering, medical devices, metallurgy, nanotechnology, mechanical engineering and consumer products. He has significant experience managing large domestic and international patent portfolios in these industries.

Mr. Krieger has an active Inter Partes Review (IPR) practice, having served as lead counsel in 10 IPR proceedings. He has represented clients both as petitioner and patent owner, having achieved several early decisions of non-institution without the need or expense of trial. He has a remarkably solid track record: representing patent owners, 2 of his IPRs were denied institution, and 3 resulted in favorable decisions after trial. All 5 cases resulted in the validation of all instituted claims—a result achieved in less than 5% of IPR proceedings. In 2017, Mr. Krieger successfully represented Petitioner in two IPRs, resulting in the Patent Owner requesting adverse judgment. In 2018, Mr. Krieger took three IPRs to trial on behalf of Petitioner.

He also actively prepares non-infringement and validity opinions including comprehensive freedom-to-operate (FTO) analyses in the chemical, polymer, medical device, and mechanical arts from both due diligence and litigation perspectives. Mr. Krieger also has been actively involved in numerous patent litigation matters and has participated in all phases of discovery, trial, and appeals. He is also experienced in Section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC).

Mr. Krieger is also actively involved in numerous patent litigation matters and has participated in all phases of discovery, trial, and appeals. He is also experienced in Section 337 investigations before the US International Trade Commission (ITC).

Mr. Krieger lectures and publishes frequently on various intellectual property topics, including the America Invents Act, IPR and Post Grant Review (PGR) proceedings, best practices in drafting patent applications and the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016.

While attending law school, Mr. Krieger was a member of the Florida Law Review.

Mr. Krieger was recommended by Legal 500 US in 2018 for Patent Prosecution.

More
Experience

Mr. Krieger leads a patent prosecution team for clients in the following fields: vascular products and balloon catheters, industrial chemicals, blood testing equipment, pharmaceuticals and agrochemical products.

Counsel for patentee Celanese in five IPR 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.

Counsel for petitioner Celanese in five IPR proceedings challenging patents owned by competitor Daicel Corporation. All five IPRs were instituted, with 2 being immediately dropped when Daicel filed requests for adverse judgements. 3 remain pending. United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Case Numbers IPR2017-00162, IPR2017-00163, IPR2017-00164, IPR2017-00165 and IPR2017-00166.

Insights
Services
Industries
Education

University of Florida College of Law, J.D. (1999)

College of William and Mary, B.S., Chemistry (1995)

Admissions

District of Columbia (2002)

New York (2000)

Not admitted in Colorado, practicing exclusively before the USPTO

Practice temporarily authorized pending admission under C.R.C.P. 205.6

More
Court Admissions

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2001)

U.S. Supreme Court

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia

More
Professional & Community Activities

American Bar Association, Member

Federal Circuit Bar Association, Member

American Intellectual Property Law Association, Member

Intellectual Property Owners Association, Member

American Chemical Society, Member

ITC Trial Lawyers Association, Member

PTAB and TTAB Committee (Federal Circuit Bar Association), Member

PTAB Bar Association, Member

Committee on Patents and Related Matters (ACS), Member

More

Latest Thinking

View more Insights
Insights Center
close
Loading...
If you would like to receive related Insights and information from Kilpatrick Townsend, please provide your contact details by filling out the form and clicking “Agree.” If you would like to access the PDF only, please click “Download Only.”