Skip to main content

Oliver F. Ennis

Associate

[email protected]

+1.617.239.8417

Follow:
Share:

Oliver is an associate whose practice emphasizes patent litigation involving high tech innovations. He first joined Mintz as a Summer Associate in 2020, and now plays an integral role on litigation teams in International Trade Commission cases and in cases adjudicated in District Court and at the USPTO. 

During law school, Oliver worked as a teaching assistant, did clinical work with the Middlesex DA's office, and led the law school's Student Veterans Association. His work was also published in the International Trade Commission Trial Lawyer Association's 337 Reporter (the Paul J. Luckern Summer Associate Edition).  

Prior to law school, Oliver served seven years in the Army as an infantry officer. He graduated from the U.S. Army Ranger School and deployed twice to Afghanistan with the 101st Airborne Division.

viewpoints

An Emerging Split on the Applicability of the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine Under the DTSA

October 10, 2022 | Blog | By Oliver Ennis, Nicholas Armington, Adam Samansky

Read more

Open Question: Use of Stolen Trade Secrets May or May Not Qualify as a Predicate Act Under RICO

March 10, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Michael McNamara, Nicholas Armington, Oliver Ennis

Read more

China’s New Intellectual Property Mediation Rules

January 4, 2022 | Blog | By Matthew Hurley, Oliver Ennis, Tianyi Tan

In what appears to be an effort to standardize and professionalize its mediation practices and procedures, China recently enacted new rules governing the mediation of intellectual property disputes. Issued by the Mediation Center of the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade, a national foreign trade body, the new rules create a framework that can guide IP dispute mediation nationwide. It appears that China is hoping that these steps will make it a more popular mediation forum among foreign parties.
Read more
In "ROHM Semiconductor USA, LLC v. MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc.", th Federal Circuit held that an arbitrator, not a federal district court, should decide whether a dispute arising from a technology license is subject to mandatory arbitration. Agreeing with a long line of decisions from other circuits, the Federal Circuit found that where an agreement incorporates by reference rules allowing an arbitrator to determine arbitrability, those rules should be given effect and an arbitrator, not a court, should decide whether the dispute is subject to arbitration.
Read more
Read less

News & Press

News Thumbnail
Mintz Member Adam Samansky and Associates Nicholas Armington and Oliver Ennis co-authored an article re-published in Law360 exploring the split amongst federal courts on the Defend Trade Secrets Act.
News Thumbnail
Mintz Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Matthew Hurley, Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud, and Associate Oliver Ennis co-authored an article published in the November/December 2021 issue of IP Litigator exploring why arbitration has become an increasingly attractive alternative for resolving IP disputes. The authors wrote that while arbitration isn’t the right fit (or even available) in all situations, IP rights holders should consider adding it to their enforcement strategies.
Read less

Oliver F. Ennis

Associate

Boston