![[IPWatchdog Logo]](https://ipwatchdog.com/wp-content/themes/IPWatchdog%20-%202023/assets/images/temp/logo-small@2x.png){kind=logo}
Heather Repicky
is a the deputy chair of the Litigation Department of Nutter McClennen & Fish and a member of the firm’s IP Litigation practice group. She focuses her practice on civil litigation, with an emphasis on IP and complex commercial matters. Heather represents clients in all stages of the litigation lifecycle—pre-trial, trial, and appeal—in both state and federal courts. Heather has a depth of knowledge on patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret issues facing companies both large and small. This knowledge, combined with her strategic thinking, garners positive results for clients.
For more information or to contact Heather, please visit her Firm Profile Page.
For more information or to contact Heather, please visit her Firm Profile Page.
Recent Articles by
Federal Circuit Issues Precedential Decisions On Who Can Petition for and Who Can Be Subject to Inter Partes Review
Late last week, the Federal Circuit issued Power Integrations, Inc. v. Semiconductor Components Indus., LLC and Regents of the Univ. of Minnesota v. LSI Corp. These two precedential decisions bring further clarity to who is subject to the time bar for filing petitions for inter partes review (IPR) and whether sovereign immunity protects patents from being subject to IPR challenges. The key takeaways are: (1) Consider the impact of mergers and acquisitions on IPR petitions, including those that have already been filed; and (2) Patents owned by states (including, state universities and research institutions) can be challenged in an IPR.
What You Need to Know about the District of Massachusetts’ New Local Patent Rules
On June 1, 2018, the new patent local rules went into effect in the District of Massachusetts following a substantial overhaul that began over one year ago. In January 2017, the judges in D. Mass. formed a committee which included ten local patent litigators to advise the court on revising its practices specific to patent litigation in the district. The final draft of the proposed rules was released for public comment from December 2017 through February 2018, giving other patent litigators in the district and interested parties a first glimpse of the new rules and the ability to weigh in on their implications. This week the court announced its final version of the rules, which will apply to all cases for which a scheduling order as yet to issue.