IP Prosecution and Portfolio Management
Overview
The intellectual property team at Crowell & Moring helps clients across the United States and abroad realize the full value of their intellectual property and defend against unauthorized use of their ideas— assets often described as "today's international currency." Successful strategy, protection, and management of intellectual property rights can play a significant role in the broader success or failure of a business venture, especially where substantial effort and capital investment are devoted to the development of new technology or new ideas.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.18.26
“To IPR or Not to IPR?” — Director Squires Offers Clarity, With Data and History
For 15 years, the question “Should we file an IPR?” was easy. The answer — almost invariably — was “yes.” High institution rates, a famously skeptical U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and minimal downside made inter partes review (IPR) a nearly reflexive tool in the litigator’s arsenal. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Squires’ precedential decision issued May 14, 2026, in Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. v. Kurin, Inc. (IPR2026-00097) provides clarity to that calculus.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 05.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.13.26
Client Alert | 10 min read | 03.19.26
Insights
EV charging stations & connectors: the importance of design patents
|11.15.24
EV Design & Manufacturing
Safe Harbors in Europe: An Update on the Research and Bolar Exemptions to Patent Infringement
|07.30.15
Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 33, No. 7
Counterfeit remains seized despite expiration of patent, decides Antwerp Judge
|02.19.15
Kluwer Patent Blog
Crowell Launches Denver Office, Tapping Deep Into Local Talent Pool
|10.14.21
The National Law Journal
- |
04.01.15
Textile Insight
ITC Excludes Chinese Company for 10-Years for Trade Secrets Misappropriation
|06.05.15
Crowell & Moring's Trade Secrets Trends
Professionals
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.18.26
“To IPR or Not to IPR?” — Director Squires Offers Clarity, With Data and History
For 15 years, the question “Should we file an IPR?” was easy. The answer — almost invariably — was “yes.” High institution rates, a famously skeptical U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and minimal downside made inter partes review (IPR) a nearly reflexive tool in the litigator’s arsenal. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Squires’ precedential decision issued May 14, 2026, in Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. v. Kurin, Inc. (IPR2026-00097) provides clarity to that calculus.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 05.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.13.26
Client Alert | 10 min read | 03.19.26
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.18.26
“To IPR or Not to IPR?” — Director Squires Offers Clarity, With Data and History
For 15 years, the question “Should we file an IPR?” was easy. The answer — almost invariably — was “yes.” High institution rates, a famously skeptical U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and minimal downside made inter partes review (IPR) a nearly reflexive tool in the litigator’s arsenal. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Squires’ precedential decision issued May 14, 2026, in Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. v. Kurin, Inc. (IPR2026-00097) provides clarity to that calculus.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 05.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.13.26
Client Alert | 10 min read | 03.19.26














