Shannon Lentz
Overview
Companies and innovators looking for creative solutions to complex intellectual property issues trust Shannon Lentz to think outside the box. Whether it is looking for ways to challenge or defend existing patents, or procuring new ones, Shannon has helped craft strategies that mitigate risk and maximize return on intellectual property investments.
Career & Education
- University of Maryland School of Law, J.D.
- University of Maryland, College Park, B.S., molecular biology and genetics
- District of Columbia
- Maryland
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Shannon's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.11.25
The Pendulum of Fintiv in Motion
On February 28, 2025, the USPTO announced that it was rescinding a 2022 memorandum issued by former USPTO Director Kathi Vidal, entitled “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” which had curtailed discretionary denials of PTAB post-grant proceedings. The February 2025 announcement directs parties to refer to PTAB precedent for guidance, including the decisions in Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc., IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) and Sotera Wireless, Inc. v. Masimo Corp., IPR2020-01019, Paper 12 (PTAB Dec. 1, 2020). The announcement further indicates that, to the extent any PTAB or Director Review decisions relied on the 2022 memorandum, the portions of those decisions shall not be binding or persuasive on the PTAB.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.11.24
Enabling Practitioners: USPTO Issues Guidelines for Assessing Enablement Post-Amgen
Press Coverage | 01.04.24
Crowell IP Powerhouse Rea Leaves Legacy Of Women Leaders At Firm
Press Coverage | 01.11.23
Crowell & Moring Promotes Largest Partner Class in Its History
Representative Matters
- Representing LifeNet Health in a five-patent case against Surgalign (f/k/a RTI Surgical) involving soft tissue grafts and spinal implants, successfully defending LifeNet Health’s patents against IPR petitions filed by Surgalign.
- Represented inventors in a highly contested patent inventorship bench trial in the Central District of California and subsequent appeal to the Federal Circuit involving a pharmaceutical compound.
- Moderna v. CureVac: Represented patent owner CureVac in inter partes review before the PTAB relating to purification of RNA.
- Apotex v. Amgen, IPR2016-01542 (PTAB): Represented petitioner Apotex in an inter partes review successfully invalidating a patent relating to Neupogen® and Neulasta®.
- LifeNet Health v. Life Cell Corp., No. 2:13-cv-00486 (E.D. Virginia): Represented plaintiff LifeNet in patent-infringement action involving soft-tissue grafts. Jury awarded LifeNet over $34 million; decision affirmed on appeal.
- Represented university system in patent license dispute over cancer treatment in which the plaintiff pharmaceutical company sought damages exceeding $200 million. Obtained summary adjudication in favor of client.
- Secured a significant victory (a preliminary injunction against patent infringement through trial) on behalf of Lonza Walkersville, Inc. against Israel-based Adva Biotechnology Ltd. in a case involving point-of-care cell-therapy technology.
Shannon's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.11.25
The Pendulum of Fintiv in Motion
On February 28, 2025, the USPTO announced that it was rescinding a 2022 memorandum issued by former USPTO Director Kathi Vidal, entitled “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” which had curtailed discretionary denials of PTAB post-grant proceedings. The February 2025 announcement directs parties to refer to PTAB precedent for guidance, including the decisions in Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc., IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) and Sotera Wireless, Inc. v. Masimo Corp., IPR2020-01019, Paper 12 (PTAB Dec. 1, 2020). The announcement further indicates that, to the extent any PTAB or Director Review decisions relied on the 2022 memorandum, the portions of those decisions shall not be binding or persuasive on the PTAB.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.11.24
Enabling Practitioners: USPTO Issues Guidelines for Assessing Enablement Post-Amgen
Press Coverage | 01.04.24
Crowell IP Powerhouse Rea Leaves Legacy Of Women Leaders At Firm
Press Coverage | 01.11.23
Crowell & Moring Promotes Largest Partner Class in Its History
Insights
Shannon's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.11.25
The Pendulum of Fintiv in Motion
On February 28, 2025, the USPTO announced that it was rescinding a 2022 memorandum issued by former USPTO Director Kathi Vidal, entitled “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” which had curtailed discretionary denials of PTAB post-grant proceedings. The February 2025 announcement directs parties to refer to PTAB precedent for guidance, including the decisions in Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc., IPR2020-00019, Paper 11 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020) and Sotera Wireless, Inc. v. Masimo Corp., IPR2020-01019, Paper 12 (PTAB Dec. 1, 2020). The announcement further indicates that, to the extent any PTAB or Director Review decisions relied on the 2022 memorandum, the portions of those decisions shall not be binding or persuasive on the PTAB.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.11.24
Enabling Practitioners: USPTO Issues Guidelines for Assessing Enablement Post-Amgen
Press Coverage | 01.04.24
Crowell IP Powerhouse Rea Leaves Legacy Of Women Leaders At Firm
Press Coverage | 01.11.23
Crowell & Moring Promotes Largest Partner Class in Its History
