Skip to main content

Daniel B. Weinger

Member

[email protected]

+1.617.348.1629

Share:

Daniel is a litigator whose intellectual property practice focuses on patent and technology litigation at the International Trade Commission, the Federal District Courts, and the Patent Office. He handles disputes involving a wide range of technologies, including software, smartphones (and other converged devices), LEDs, semiconductor circuits and fabrication processes, and wireless technology standards.  Viewing patent and technology litigation through the lens of what is best for the business of his clients, Daniel counsels to achieve the best business result possible.  The scope of this work includes representing clients through all phases of patent strategy and litigation, both offensive and defensive, from inception of an enforcement program through final resolution. Daniel also works with owners of standard essential patents on issues relating to compliance with FRAND obligations, global enforcement, and licensing.

Prior to law school, Daniel worked as a database programmer with InterSystems, Corp., where he specialized in programming solutions for database development with a focus primarily on integration engines.

While Daniel focuses his practice on intellectual property related matters, he also handles other complex civil litigation related to technology such as trade secret and technology contract disputes. Daniel served as a Special Assistant District Attorney in the Middlesex County (MA) District Attorney's Office, based in the Framingham, MA, district court. During that time, Daniel prosecuted and tried numerous drug, larceny, breaking and entering, and motor vehicle cases in bench and jury sessions, and conducted day-to-day operations required by an ADA.

Education

  • Boston College (JD)
  • New York University (BA, Computer Science)

Involvement

  • Past Member, Board of Trustees, Ben Franklin Institute of Technology

Languages

- Hebrew

Recent Insights

News & Press

Events

Viewpoints

Podcast Viewpoint Image
In this episode of the EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS: Intellectual Property podcast, Mintz Intellectual Property attorneys Andrew Skale and Daniel Weinger explore copyright protections for music and other creative works.
Read more
Patent Litigation Viewpoint Thumbnail

Supreme Court Hammers Final Nail in the IP Bridge v. TCL Coffin

July 2, 2021 | Blog | By Michael Renaud, Daniel Weinger, Kara E. Grogan

On Monday, the Supreme Court denied TCL Communication’s certiorari petition, without comment, appealing the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the essentiality of a patent claim is a question for the jury rather than judges to resolve during claim construction.  The denial of cert by the Supreme Court cements the Federal Circuit ruling which made proving infringement of standard essential patents easier by allowing reliance on the standard to show such infringement. 
Read more
IPRs and Other Post-Grant Porceedings Viewpoint Thumbnail
When confronted with instituted IPRs, Patent Owners should identify and exploit issues that the Petition glossed over and bring those to the attention of the Board.  This will highlight for the Board important issues that the Petition failed to sufficiently address and can lead to victory for the Patent Owner. 
Read more
Podcast Viewpoint Image
In this episode of the EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS: Intellectual Property podcast, attorneys Drew DeVoogd and Dan Weinger break down the recent Supreme Court decision in United States v. Arthrex, where the Court found that Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) are hired in violation of the Appointments Clause, and crafted a new structure for the PTAB.  The Arthrex case has far reaching implications not just in patent law, but across the administrative bodies of the federal government.
Read more
Patent Litigation Viewpoint Thumbnail
Over the last decade, patent litigation has exploded at the International Trade Commission (“ITC”), which has caused the ITC to seek out ways to increase efficiency.  Several years ago, the ITC introduced an early 100-Day pilot program to dispose of dispositive issues early on in investigations. While now a mainstay, the 100-Day pilot program is rarely utilized. 
Read more
Podcast Viewpoint Image
In this episode of our Exclusive Rights podcast series, Mintz IP attorneys Daniel Weinger and Todd B. Buck, PhD, discuss the recent decision by the Biden Administration to signal US approval of a proposal to waive intellectual property rights related to COVID-19 vaccines currently under review at the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Read more
Podcast Viewpoint Image

EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS: Intellectual Property — Basics of ITC Litigation

May 6, 2021 | Podcast | By Daniel Weinger, Andrew DeVoogd

Intellectual property rights protect your innovations and competitive position in the market.
Read more
IPRs and Other Post-Grant Porceedings Viewpoint Thumbnail

Patent Owner Tip #5 for Surviving An Instituted IPR: The Right Expert Can Save Your Patent

May 6, 2021 | Blog | By Daniel Weinger, Monique Winters Macek

The right expert can be the critical piece that saves the validity of your patent. Finding the right expert for a patent owner requires careful selection and due diligence. We previously detailed how your expert’s testimony can make or break your Patent Owner’s Response (“POR”).
Read more
IPRs and Other Post-Grant Porceedings Viewpoint Thumbnail

PTAB Reinforces Uneven Evidentiary Playing Field in IPRs

April 16, 2021 | Blog | By Daniel Weinger, Nana Liu

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently grappled with the admission into evidence of expert deposition testimony that was presumably harmful to the petitioner in an inter partes review (IPR), and barred the testimony from coming into evidence. 
Read more
Intellectual Property Viewpoints Thumbnail

Year in Review: The Most Popular IP Posts of 2020

January 14, 2021 | Blog | By Christina Sperry

As 2021 begins and intellectual property (IP) strategies are being developed for the new year, it is a good time to reflect on what IP issues were prominent in 2020.  According to many readers, hot topics included Chinese foreign filing licenses, patenting involving either artificial intelligence (AI) or COVID-19, inter partes review, and attorney fee awards.
Read more

News & Press

News Thumbnail
Law360 reported that Mintz client American video codec company DivX, an early innovator in the digital streaming video and digital rights management scene, has reached confidential settlements with LG and Samsung, resolving international litigation claiming they infringe DivX’s streaming patents with their smart televisions. The Mintz team representing DivX is led by Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud and Member Adam Rizk and includes Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Matthew Hurley, Members Keith Carroll, Marguerite McConihe, Michael McNamara, Samuel Davenport, and Daniel Weinger, and Associates Matthew Karambelas, Jessica Perry, and Nana Liu.
News Thumbnail
Mintz Member Daniel B. Weinger was quoted in an article published by Law360 on a case recently taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court, Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic Inc., which will determine whether a defendant in a patent infringement action who assigned the patent, or is in privity with an assignor of the patent, may have a defense of invalidity heard on the merits.
News Thumbnail
In this Law360 expert analysis article, Mintz Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud and Members James Wodarski and Daniel Weinger reflected on the biggest standard essential patent (SEP) victories of patent owners in 2020.
News Thumbnail
Mintz Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud, Members James Wodarski and Daniel Weinger, and Associate Kara Grogan co-authored an article published by IPWatchdog that critiques an article recently published in the University of San Diego Law titled “Glory Days: Do the Anticompetitive Risks of Standards-Essential Patent Pools Outweigh Their Procompetitive Benefits?,” which criticized patent pools, alleging inefficiencies and anticompetitive risks of pools for standard essential patents.
News Thumbnail
Mintz Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud, Members James Wodarski and Daniel Weinger, and Associate Kara Grogan co-authored an article published by IPWatchdog examining patent pools, an elective market mechanism designed to provide benefits to both innovators and implementers.
News Thumbnail
Mintz Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud, Member and Co-chair of the firm’s Antitrust Practice Joseph Miller, and Member Daniel Weinger co-authored a Law360 expert analysis article that examined an updated business review letter issued by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)'s Antitrust Division to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., which clarified the DOJ's views on licensing and enforcement practices related to standard essential patent (SEP)s.
News Thumbnail
Mintz Member Daniel Weinger and Associates Vincent Ferraro and Chris Duerden co-authored a recent Law360 expert analysis article that examined how the Federal Circuit’s en banc ruling in Aqua Products Inc. v. Matal has affected the motion to amend practice at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, as well as other favorable trends for patent owners.
An article published by Law360 reported that following the U.S. International Trade Commission’s initial decision that Jennewein Biotechnologie GmbH’s imports infringe a Glycosyn LLC patent on human milk oligosaccharides, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied Jennewein’s petition for post-grant review of a related patent.

The Mintz team representing Glycosyn at the ITC includes Michael Newman, Thomas Wintner, Michael Renaud and James Wodarski; and the Mintz team representing Glycosyn at the PTAB includes Michael Newman, Thomas Wintner, Peter Cuomo and Daniel Weinger.
This feature story notes wireless communications company ParkerVision’s request to lift a pause in its lawsuit with Apple, LG, and Qualcomm over several smartphone patents. James Wodarski, Michael McNamara, Kristina Cary, and Daniel Weinger are representing ParkerVision in the case.
In this column, Mintz attorneys James Wodarski, Andrew DeVoogd, Daniel Weinger, and Matthew Karambelas analyze the decision made by the ITC about patent claims that have been negated by Alice Corp v. CLS Bank International in the 100-Day Pilot Program.