Joseph Myles

Associate

Finnegan

Joseph Myles is an Associate with Finnegan. He focuses on patent litigation in a range of patent venues, including district courts, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). He leverages trial experience gained through interning at the D.C. Superior Court to represent high-tech companies through all phases of litigation.

Joseph is experienced in pre-litigation strategy, discovery, and motions practice, advising clients through the formation of patent-specific litigation positions, including infringement, validity, claim construction, and unenforceability. He drafts and oversees Patent Office challenges for petitioners and patent owners, including inter partes reviews, post-grant reviews, and ex parte reexaminations. Joseph counsels clients through the patent application process before the USPTO, including designing patent protection plans, managing large portfolios, and overseeing office action responses and examiner interviews.

Joseph drafts motions and claim construction briefing, investigates infringement and validity positions, and coordinates district court and PTAB trial strategy. He is well versed in using the 28 U.S.C. § 1782 discovery procedure to seek important litigation materials from U.S. parties for use in foreign patent infringement proceedings. He has written extensively on the uses of § 1782 discovery and participated in the formation of § 1782 practical guidance through The Sedona Conference. Joseph also assists clients with pre-litigation strategy, including drafting noninfringement opinions and investigating potential patent infringement.

Recent Articles by Joseph Myles

Induced Infringement: The Knowledge Requirement and When it is Established

To succeed on a claim of induced infringement, a patent owner must show that the accused infringer (1) actively encouraged infringement, (2) knew that the acts they induced constituted patent infringement, and (3) actuated direct patent infringement by those encouraging acts. In many courts, the knowledge requirement can be satisfied by service of a complaint for patent infringement itself. So, the accused infringer can start to incur liability at the onset of litigation. In the minority of courts, only pre-suit knowledge can satisfy the knowledge requirement. In those jurisdictions, the plaintiff must show the accused infringer knew about the alleged infringement before the onset of litigation. The amount of evidence required to show pre-suit knowledge at the pleading phase is an open question.

August 2, 2022

View All Posts