Dustin Weeks

Robert Schaffer

Dustin Weeks is an associate in the intellectual property practice group at Troutman Sanders. His practice spans all areas of intellectual property law, including patent prosecution, patent litigation (including Hatch-Waxman litigation), and client counseling. He represents clients ranging from start-ups and solo inventors to Fortune 500 companies. Dustin works closely with his clients to learn their business objectives so that he can tailor strategies to procure, protect, and enforce their intellectual property. Dustin specializes in post-grant proceedings (e.g. Inter Partes Reviews) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) where he has extensive experience representing both patent owners and petitioners across a wide range of technologies, including wireless networking, pharmaceuticals, MEMs devices, medical devices, and electro-mechanical consumer devices. Dustin's broad experience in patent prosecution, counseling, and patent litigation uniquely positions him to navigate the blended practice of post-grant proceedings.

For more information or to contact Dustin, please visit his Firm Profile Page.


Posts by Dustin Weeks


Personal Jurisdiction is Not Established by Prior Lawsuit or Sending Infringement Notice Letters

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed the District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee’s dismissal of a declaratory judgment action based on a finding of lack …

Reasonable Royalty Cannot Include Activities That Do Not Constitute Patent Infringement

In Enplas Display Device Corp. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co., the Federal Circuit vacated a $4 million damages award to Seoul Semiconductor Co. (“Seoul”), holding that the district court …

Defensive Collateral Estoppel Applies Only if Essentially Identical Accused Product Found Non-infringing

In its opinion, the Federal Circuit explained that defensive collateral estoppel of non-infringement applies in very limited circumstances where “a close identity exists between the relevant features …

CAFC: Patent Claim Directed to Concrete Assignment of Specified Functions is Patent Eligible

The Federal Circuit recently reversed the Western District of Washington’s dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure where the district court held …

Federal Circuit Holds a ‘Similar Enough’ Claim Construction Doesn’t Violate the APA

In Hamilton Beach Brands v. F’Real Foods, the Federal Circuit found that under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s adopted claim …

Federal Circuit affirms PTAB Mixed Decision in Acceleration Bay v. Activision Blizzard

Acceleration Bay appealed the final written decisions of the Board holding claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 6,829,634, claims 1-11 and 16-19 of U.S. Patent No. 6,701,344, …

Federal Circuit says Assignor Estoppel Has “No Place” in IPR Proceedings

The Federal Circuit recently found that assignor estoppel has “no place in IPR proceedings,” affirming a holding of the Patent Trials and Appeal Board (“Board”) that assignor …

Federal Circuit Decision Erases $234 million Damages Awarded to WARF

The Federal Circuit recently issued a ruling reversing the district court’s denial of Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) motion for judgment as a matter of law (“JMOL”) …

Service Starts § 315(b) Time-Bar Even If Complaint Involuntarily Dismissed Without Prejudice

In Bennett Regulator Guards, Inc. v. Atlanta Gas Light Co. the Federal Circuit ruled the time-bar for filing a petition for inter partes review in Section 315(b) …

Federal Circuit: Attorneys Not Liable for Attorney’s Fees Where Law is Unsettled

A claim is entirely without color when it lacks any legal or factual basis.  Because of the relative paucity of § 101 cases between Alice and AlphaCap’s complaint, …

CAFC: Hyatt APA Challenges Time-Barred and Based on Incorrect Statutory Interpretation

The Federal Circuit recently issued an opinion in a decades-longbattle over the microcomputer patent applications of Mr. Hyatt, the named inventor on more than 70 issued patents and …

Entire market rule only when infringed feature constitutes sole basis for consumer demand

To base its damages theory on the entire market value rule, Power Integrations bore the burden of proving “the patented feature is the sole driver of customer …

CAFC Reverses Nonobviousness Ruling in IPR as Board Failed to Apply Burden-Shifting Standard

The Federal Circuit recently reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) inter partes review decision on nonobviousness, holding that the Board erred when it did not …

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Invalidation of Claims Federal Circuit Previously Upheld as Valid

Previously, the ITC instituted an investigation of Instradentdental implants based on a complaint filed by Nobel alleging violations of 19 U.S.C. § 1337 by reason of importation of …

To invalidate method claims a challenger must show more than the prior art is ‘capable of’ performing the claimed limitations

To invalidate method claims, a challenger must show more than that the prior art is “capable of” performing the claimed limitations—the challenger should also show that “…

Our website uses cookies to provide you with a better experience. Read our privacy policy for more information.Accept and Close