Brent Babcock is the chair of Loeb & Loeb’s PTAB Trials Practice Group. He represents high-technology clients in every aspect of intellectual property disputes, focusing on federal district court litigation throughout the country, trials and post-grant patent proceedings before the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) (formerly the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences), ex parte appeals before the PTAB, and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) proceedings, including domestic and international arbitrations. His practice also includes pre-litigation counseling, pre-interference and post-grant proceeding consulting, ex parte appeal briefing and oral hearings before the PTAB, and appellate briefing and oral argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from decisions of the district courts and the PTAB.
Brent has extensive experience in USPTO trials and post-grant proceedings and has been involved in more than 35 patent interferences and many reexaminations during the past twenty-five years. He has also been involved in more than 140 recent Inter Partes Review, Covered Business Method Review, Post Grant Review, and Derivation proceedings before the PTAB. Brent’s experience and skills have led to him being repeatedly named one of the 40 top lawyers nationwide in PTAB post-grant practice by Intellectual Asset Management (IAM Patent 1000) magazine.
In an energetic dissent in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Tech., LP, 590 U.S. __ (Apr. 20, 2020), U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch provides a compelling defense of patent rights, and he champions a patent owner’s ability to obtain judicial review of certain threshold administrative decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). But while Justice Gorsuch’s insightful analysis is receiving accolades from many in the patent community, it failed to garner any support among his Supreme Court colleagues, save for one, Justice Sotomayor.