is an associate at KDB specializing in patent matters. Specifically, he focuses on patent, preparation and prosecution and due diligence.
Prior to joining KDB, Ryan interned as an examiner at the United States Patent and Trademark Office and as a patent agent at BAE Systems Inc. Before entering the practice of law, he worked at Associated Environmental Systems as a mechanical design engineer. His experience provides him with knowledge of all industries, where he specifically focuses on: medical devices, pharmaceuticals, life sciences, healthcare, financial services, heavy industry and robotics.
He received his J.D. from New Hampshire School of Law and his B.S. in mechanical engineering from Northeastern University. Ryan has bar admissions in Massachusetts and is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
For more information or to reach out to Ryan, please visit his Firm Bio Page.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) provides invalidity tools via inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR), but which route is better? … PGRs are estimated to cost more because of their broader discovery rules. If cost is a major factor, IPRs are a less-expensive option due to restricted allowance of discovery, the most expensive aspect of patent litigation… If the invalidating arguments or art are not strong, an IPR may be a better option due to its lower threshold for institution. The same prior art arguments that failed in a petition for a PGR may have succeeded in an IPR petition due to the lower standard.
Equitable estoppel may be appropriate for the defendant in SCA v. First Quality since the plaintiff was silent for years after the defendant asserted invalidity (possibly fulfilling the misleading conduct through inaction and reliance on that conduct). But can equitable estoppel be relied upon as a defense against a dormant plaintiff in the example illustrated above? Below, we consider the two elements of equitable estoppel that replace the unreasonable delay element of laches: misleading conduct and reliance.