Michelle Wang

Counsel

Overview

Michelle Wang represents clients in intellectual property litigation and counseling. In addition to her background in biomedical engineering, she has experience in a broad range of technologies, including medical devices, life sciences, pharmaceuticals, disruptive technologies, and electronic devices, among others.

Michelle focuses on patent and trade secret actions in federal district court, having litigated in courts across the country. In addition to litigation, Michelle counsels clients on the evaluation of patents of third parties and prepares legal opinions relating to patent invalidity, noninfringement, and unenforceability. With her experience in drafting and prosecuting patent applications, Michelle also advises clients on IP procurement and enforcement strategies.

Michelle is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s New York office.

Career & Education

    • University of Texas at Austin, B.S., with highest honors, Biomedical Engineering, 2009
    • New York University School of Law, J.D., 2013
    • University of Texas at Austin, B.S., with highest honors, Biomedical Engineering, 2009
    • New York University School of Law, J.D., 2013
    • New York
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
    • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
    • New York
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
    • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
    • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
    • National Asian Pacific American Bar Association
    • Asian American Bar Association of New York
    • New York Intellectual Property Law Association
    • National Asian Pacific American Bar Association
    • Asian American Bar Association of New York
    • New York Intellectual Property Law Association

Michelle's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.26.26

pH, Prosecution History Estoppel, and Patent Scope: Three Lessons from the Federal Circuit's Latest Hatch-Waxman Ruling

On May 13, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court judgment of no infringement in Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 24-1641. The decision offers important guidance for patent holders and generic manufacturers on the role of industry standards in interpreting scientific terminology during claim construction, prosecution history estoppel, and the disclosure-dedication rule....

Representative Matters

  • Represented pharmaceutical company in patent infringement action involving pre-filled syringe technology in the Northern District of New York.
  • Represented pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman patent action involving abuse-deterrent hydrocodone bitartrate extended-release tablets in the District of Delaware.
  • Represented Rio Tinto in patent infringement action involving aluminum alloy in the District of Delaware.
  • Defended Google in patent infringement action filed by a non-practicing entity involving wireless phone charging technology in the Western District of Texas.
  • Represented Alamo Group in utility and design patent infringement actions involving heavy mulching machinery and components in the Southern District of Ohio.
  • Represented Uni-Systems LLC in patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation action involving stadium retractable roof technology in the Eastern District of New York.

Michelle's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.26.26

pH, Prosecution History Estoppel, and Patent Scope: Three Lessons from the Federal Circuit's Latest Hatch-Waxman Ruling

On May 13, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court judgment of no infringement in Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 24-1641. The decision offers important guidance for patent holders and generic manufacturers on the role of industry standards in interpreting scientific terminology during claim construction, prosecution history estoppel, and the disclosure-dedication rule....

Recognition

  • Commitment to Justice Awards – Legal Team Award, Her Justice, 2023

Michelle's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.26.26

pH, Prosecution History Estoppel, and Patent Scope: Three Lessons from the Federal Circuit's Latest Hatch-Waxman Ruling

On May 13, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court judgment of no infringement in Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 24-1641. The decision offers important guidance for patent holders and generic manufacturers on the role of industry standards in interpreting scientific terminology during claim construction, prosecution history estoppel, and the disclosure-dedication rule....

Michelle's Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.26.26

pH, Prosecution History Estoppel, and Patent Scope: Three Lessons from the Federal Circuit's Latest Hatch-Waxman Ruling

On May 13, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court judgment of no infringement in Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 24-1641. The decision offers important guidance for patent holders and generic manufacturers on the role of industry standards in interpreting scientific terminology during claim construction, prosecution history estoppel, and the disclosure-dedication rule....