Brad Scheller is a trial attorney who focuses his patent litigation practice on representing clients in the automotive devices, thermoplastics, electronic components and consumer products industries in federal district court, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and at the International Trade Commission. With a background in mechanical engineering and over 14 years of experience practicing law, Brad has successfully represented patent owners in enforcing their rights against infringers and protecting those rights from challenges of invalidity, and has also successfully defended and negotiated settlements for client innovators accused of infringement and unfair commercial practices.
Brad focuses his litigation practice on patent disputes in Federal District Courts, including the Eastern District of Texas, Southern District of California, District of Delaware, Northern District of California and the Eastern District of New York, as well as at the International Trade Commission. Brad has handled disputes involving a variety of technologies, including electric motors, thermoplastics, electrical components, electronic payment and financial systems, computer software and various consumer products, including cosmetics, video game systems and personal watercraft.
Brad also has extensive experience in inter partes review (IPR) and covered business method patent review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and repeatedly defends and successfully preserves the rights of patent owners before this tribunal. He is well-versed in the particularities of post-grant proceedings from both the petitioner and patent owner perspective and provides comprehensive post-grant counseling to clients, including advising on post-grant proceedings concurrent with federal district court litigation and International Trade Commission investigations. As a registered patent attorney, Brad enjoys representing his clients in patent office proceedings on a variety of technologies.
Brad also counsels individual inventors and emerging ventures on product development strategies, renders patent clearance and validity opinions, and manages the preparation and prosecution of patent applications and portfolios in various high-technology and consumer products fields.
Brad is Co-Editor for and contributor to the Mintz Global IP Matters blog and co-chairs the firm’s Post-Grant Working Group committee.
Before joining Mintz, Brad practiced at the New York intellectual property boutique, Morgan & Finnegan LLP. He also works as the bandleader and bassist for the 8-piece jump blues band, The Slicked-Up 9’s, and plays bass in New York rock act, The Incumbents.
Education
- Villanova University (JD)
- Lehigh University (BSME)
Experience
- Defense of Multiple IPRs concerning Multilayer Capacitor Technology – representing Intellectual Ventures II LLC in IPR proceedings before the PTAB concerning encapsulated stator motor technology.
- Certain Thermoplastic-Encapsulated Electric Motors, Components Thereof, and Products and Vehicles Containing Same (337-TA-1052) - represented complainant in this ITC investigation and in parallel Federal District Court cases.
- Defense of Multiple IPRs concerning Multilayer Capacitor Technology – successfully represented American Technical Ceramics Corp. and AVX Corporation in IPR proceedings before the PTAB concerning technology for multilayer capacitor structures.
- Zero Gravity Inside, Inc. v. Footbalance System Oy (IPR2015-01769, -1770) – Represented Patent Owner in IPR proceedings before the PTAB concerning shoe insoles. IPR2015-01770 petition denied in January 2017; all claims upheld in February 2017 following oral argument in IPR2015-01769.
- American Technical Ceramics Corp. v. Presidio Components, Inc., 14-6544 (E.D.N.Y.) – representing leading international manufacturer and supplier of electronic passive components in 3-patent infringement litigation concerning capacitor technology.
- MoneyCat v. PayPal, Inc., 14-2490 (N.D. Cal.) – represented owner of portfolio of electronic payment system patents in 3-patent infringement litigation.
- Shinsedai Co. Ltd. v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., 11-2799 (S.D. Cal.) – represented video- and lifestyle-gaming technology developer and manufacturer in 4-patent infringement litigation concerning motion-controlled video games and game systems; favorable settlement terms achieved.
- Allergan v. Peter Thomas Roth Labs, LLC, 07-1316 (C.D. Cal.) – Defended skin care company in patent infringement and unfair competition action; favorable settlement terms achieved in view of winning claim construction ruling and summary judgment of non-infringement.
- Presidio Components, Inc. v. American Technical Ceramics Corp., 07-893 (S.D. Cal.) – defended electrical components manufacturer in patent infringement action concerning multilayer capacitors.
Recognition & Awards
- Included on the New York Super Lawyers: Rising Stars - Intellectual Property Litigation list (2014 - 2018)
Recent Insights
Viewpoints
Mintz Rings in 2020 with Top 10 Recognition for ITC Practice
January 6, 2020|Blog
News & Press
Viewpoints
Mintz Rings in 2020 with Top 10 Recognition for ITC Practice
January 6, 2020 | Blog
Can Infringement Contentions be Amended to Add New Claims Resulting from an Ex Parte Reexam Filed after IPRs Invalidated Some but Not All Claims?
November 5, 2019 | Blog | By Brad M Scheller, Rithika Kulathila
Precedential PTAB Panel Says Petitioners Can Join Their Own Earlier-Filed IPRs and Join New Issues in Limited Circumstance
March 19, 2019 | Blog | By William Meunier, Brad M Scheller, Vincent Ferraro, Rithika Kulathila
Supreme Court Holds AIA Did Not Alter the Settled Meaning of “On Sale”
January 22, 2019 | Blog | By Brad M Scheller, Peter Snell, Vincent Ferraro
PTAB Adopts the Phillips Claim Construction Standard in AIA Proceedings
October 11, 2018 | Blog | By Brad M Scheller, Daniel Weinger, Courtney Herndon