Joshua Hartman Image

Joshua Hartman


Merchant & Gould

Josh Hartman is a partner at Merchant & Gould.  Josh is an experienced IP litigator with Merchant & Gould’s Washington, D.C. area office and the head of the firm’s ITC Section 337 Group. Josh navigates the substantive, procedural and strategic challenges that exist when litigating before the United States International Trade Commission. He also litigates IP and unfair competition disputes in district courts and helps companies develop and protect their IP.

Josh focuses his practice on advocating for companies before the U.S. International Trade Commission in Section 337 investigations, which address unfair practices associated with imports into the United States. The disputes he handles in this arena are diverse, including patent litigation, trade secret misappropriation, antitrust, business torts and unfair competition issues.

In addition to his work before the ITC, Josh also supports clients in district court litigation and through IP counseling. The companies he serves come from a broad range of industries, including life sciences, fintech, cleantech and cybersecurity.

Over the past 13-plus years, Josh has been a critical part of many successful cases that resulted in positive outcomes for his clients. Some recent examples include ITC investigations concerning patent infringement related to in vitro diagnostic testing and trade secret protection related to lithium-ion batteries.

“ITC investigations are fast-paced. I enjoy the speed of the investigations and the dynamics of protecting IP holders’ rights with respect to the marketplace. I’m passionate about stopping the flow of imported, infringing products and about helping businesses protect their products’ access to the U.S. market.”

Recent Articles by Joshua Hartman

Planning for Success in Section 337 Investigations

Famously, section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) are fast. By statute, the ITC must conclude section 337 investigations “at the earliest practicable time . . .” 19 U.S.C. § 1337(b)(1). Investigations institute within 30 days after the Commission receives a complaint, evidentiary hearings (akin to trial) regularly occur within 8–9 months, and the ITC’s target dates for completing investigations routinely land at 14–16 months.

Opening Moves in the ITC: Strategic Considerations for Pre-Institution Filings in Section 337 Investigations

The period following the filing of a section 337 complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) can be chaotic. During this period, the Commission “examine[s] the complaint for sufficiency and compliance with” its rules, 19 C.F.R. § 210.9(a), routinely asks the complainant to provide additional information, and typically decides whether to institute an investigation within 30 days after the complaint is filed, see 19 C.F.R. § 210.10(a)(1). The complainant must address the Commission’s requests for additional information while preparing for the coming investigation. The named respondents must scramble to find counsel, assess the allegations, and ready for battle. And all section 337 litigants confront a series of strategic decisions that can send them on the path to success or failure in the investigation.

Past Events with Joshua Hartman

IPWatchdog LIVE 2023

September 17-19, 2023

Patent Litigation Masters™ 2023

Held May 15-17, 2023