Michael G. Flanigan
Overview
Based in San Francisco, Michael G. Flanigan assists clients in technology and intellectual property litigation throughout the United States. He has broad experience in federal and state courts, including post-grant proceedings (Inter Partes Reviews and post-grant reviews) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Section 337 proceedings before the International Trade Commission (ITC).
Career & Education
- Illinois
Legal Fellow, Office of the Governor, 2011–2013
- Illinois
- Embedded Software Engineer, Boston Scientific, 2007–2008
- Adjunct Professor/Teaching Assistant, Medical Innovations, Northwestern School of Law, 2010–2012
- Engineering Intern for various medical device, aircraft, and manufacturing companies
- Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, J.D.,
- Executive Production Editor, Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property
- Dean’s List, Senior Research Honors
- Historian, Black Law Student Association
- University of Southern California, M.S., computer networks, 2006
- Co-Founder/Secretary Officer, Minority Engineering Graduate Association
- North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University, B.S., summa cum laude, electrical engineering & computer science, 2004
- Dean’s List, Tau Beta Pi Engineering Honor Society, Golden Key Honor Society, Eta Kappa Nu
- Co-Webmaster, Association of Computing Machinery
- Member, National Society of Black Engineers, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
- Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, J.D.,
- California
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- Illinois
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
- U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
- Board of Directors, California Dragon Boat Association, 2018–Present
- Vice-Chair, Board of Directors, Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto, 2023–Present
- Ambassador Council, California Minority Counsel Program, 2023–Present
Michael's Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 08.21.23
In July 2023, the District of Delaware in Am. Axle & Mfg., Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC brought a long-running, closely-watched dispute to a close, leaving in its wake several guideposts for patent applicants and owners alike, including those pioneering technologies in the space of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML).[1]
Speaking Engagement | 10.12.22
“Even a General Counsel Needs Pitch; Everyone Needs a Pitch” CMCP Annual Business Conference
Representative Matters
- Represented a Canadian cloud optimization software company in patent and trademark litigation in district court over virtualization software, leading to a substantial jury verdict.
- Represented a Canadian cloud optimization software company before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), leading to a favorable outcome.
- Represented a web technology company in patent litigation in district court over backend web technology, leading to a jury verdict.
- Represented a Chicago technology company in patent litigation in district court over cloud storage technology.
- Represented a quartz slab manufacturer in a design patent litigation before U.S. International Trade Commission Section 337, leading to a favorable outcome.
- Represented an LTE cellular device manufacturer before U.S. International Trade Commission Section 337.
- Represented touch feedback technology (“haptic technology”) company in patent litigation in district court over haptic feedback technologies.
- Represented a U.S. wireless and radio frequency (RF) technology company in patent litigation in district court over RF wireless and communication network technologies.
- Represented an information and communication technology manufacturer in patent litigation in district court over telecommunication hardware and software network technology.
- Represented a networking company in patent litigation in district court over networking technologies.
- Advised a major product digitization and cloud-based solutions manufacturer in relation to the cloud technology and intellectual property landscape.
Michael's Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 08.21.23
In July 2023, the District of Delaware in Am. Axle & Mfg., Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC brought a long-running, closely-watched dispute to a close, leaving in its wake several guideposts for patent applicants and owners alike, including those pioneering technologies in the space of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML).[1]
Speaking Engagement | 10.12.22
“Even a General Counsel Needs Pitch; Everyone Needs a Pitch” CMCP Annual Business Conference
Insights
Practices
Michael's Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 08.21.23
In July 2023, the District of Delaware in Am. Axle & Mfg., Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC brought a long-running, closely-watched dispute to a close, leaving in its wake several guideposts for patent applicants and owners alike, including those pioneering technologies in the space of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML).[1]
Speaking Engagement | 10.12.22
“Even a General Counsel Needs Pitch; Everyone Needs a Pitch” CMCP Annual Business Conference
