Eli Mazour is a Partner with Harrity & Harrity LLP in Fairfax, Virginia, where he leads the firm’s patent prosecution team. Eli’s practice focuses on helping large technology companies build valuable, high-quality patent portfolios in an efficient manner. In this role, he develops and implements best practices for managing workflow and innovative, data-driven patent prosecution strategies for reaching favorable results at the USPTO.
Eli personally has experience preparing and prosecuting hundreds of patent applications related to computer software, Internet and e-commerce, telecommunications, networking devices, electronic consumer products, and medical devices.
Although Eli is known for being able to successfully reach agreements with USPTO patent examiners for clients’ most important patent applications, he is equally skilled at identifying and successfully utilizing alternative channels within the USPTO when that is not possible. In one such instance, the PTAB recently ruled in favor of one the firm’s oldest clients after Eli argued in an Oral Hearing.
Eli also helps clients evaluate existing patent portfolios, identify strategic areas for patenting, and create processes for harvesting disclosures of patentable inventions. In addition, he has been involved with licensing negotiations, patent infringement investigations, clearance of products (freedom to operate opinions), and patent litigation. As a result, he is keenly aware of the pitfalls to avoid and opportunities to grasp during patent prosecution.
Eli is also the creator and host of the Clause 8 podcast, which features interviews with the most interesting members of the IP community. Due to Clause 8 and his previous track record, he is sought out by various technology companies, legal and business professionals, and media organizations for his insights on various patent policy developments, including legislative proposals and changes at the USPTO.
Robert Giles took over the Chief IP Counsel role at Qualcomm, the world’s leading wireless technology innovator, in May 2021. In that role, Giles shepherds a team that is responsible for managing and growing 140,000 IP assets and oversees some of the most high-profile patent disputes in the world. Prior to that, Giles helped lead Qualcomm’s successful efforts in its global litigation with Apple. The litigation blossomed into more than 100 cases around the world before Apple finally agreed to settle.
Raymond Millien likes to compare himself to Forrest Gump. As someone who pivoted from a programming job at GE Aerospace to a career in intellectual property law, bounced between in-house and outside counsel roles within that space, and even got involved in public policy, he’s definitely a renaissance man. And he’s fallen into many of those jobs by accident. He credits his adventurous and successful career — working as Chief IP Counsel for big-name companies like Volvo, founding his own IP boutique, and now serving as the CEO of Harness IP — to intellectual curiosity and openness.
The 2017 TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Supreme Court decision led to a major shift in where patent litigation cases are filed in the United States. Before TC Heartland, a patent owner could bring a case in almost any district where an alleged infringer conducted business. Because of its predictable rules and streamlined procedures, the Eastern District of Texas became the most popular forum for such cases; nearly 40% of patent infringement actions were filed there in 2016. When Professor Timothy Hsieh clerked in the Eastern District of Texas, he saw firsthand the benefits – for patent owners and defendants – of experienced judges handling patent cases. TC Heartland changed that by changing the rules regarding where companies can be sued for patent infringement. By 2017, only 15% of patent infringement cases were tried in the Eastern District of Texas. Instead, patent cases became concentrated in Delaware and California.
Before Phil Warrick began working for Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), Capitol Hill wasn’t in his career plans. But when an opportunity to work with Coons emerged, he decided to take the leap. For two years, he served as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) IP counsel detailee to Coons after Coons helped restart the Senate’s IP Subcommittee, working on bipartisan initiatives like the IDEA Act and legislation to fix the Section 101 patent eligibility mess. Those efforts were a dramatic departure from Congress’s previous fixation on the “patent troll” narrative.