Sherry Knowles Image

Sherry Knowles


Knowles Intellectual Property Strategies

Sherry M. Knowles is an intellectual property attorney with 30 years of experience in global corporate and private practice, and is a member of the inaugural class of the IPWatchdog Masters™ Hall of Fame.

Currently the Principal of Knowles Intellectual Property Strategies, Ms. Knowles was the Senior Vice President and Chief Patent Counsel at GlaxoSmithKline from 2006-2010, where she served as the worldwide head of patents for all litigation and transactional matters, and managed a global department of over 200 people in 12 offices. At GSK, Ms. Knowles was a member of the Scientific Advisory Board, the Technology Investment Board, the Product Management Board, the Legal Management Team and she led the Global Patents Executive Team.

Ms. Knowles played a key role in the case of GlaxoSmithKline and Tafas v. Dudas, 541 F. Supp. 2d 805 (E.D. Va. 2008). On October 9, 2007, GSK became the first and only company in the US to file a lawsuit to challenge the Final Rules published by the US Patent and Trademark Office on August 7, 2007. During the course of litigation, 20 amicus briefs were filed by parties in support of GSK and Dr. Tafas, including from the AIPLA, PhRMA, BIO, IPO, Washington Legal Foundation and CropLife America. The litigation concluded in October 2009, when David Kappos made the decision to withdraw the contested regulations and GSK agreed to join with the PTO in a motion to dismiss all litigation.

In 2008, Managing IP Magazine named Ms. Knowles one of the top 10 most influential people in Intellectual Property, referring to her as a “Patent Owner’s Advocate.”  In 2010, the New Jersey Intellectual Property Lawyers Association awarded GSK, with Ms. Knowles as the representative, the Jefferson Medal for exceptional contribution to Intellectual Property. In 2010, Managing IP Magazine named the GSK Global Patent Team the “In-House IP Team of the Year” for 2009 for the constructive approach to IP in the developing world, the engagement with public policy in Europe and the successful resolution of the USPTO rules matter in the US.

In November 2011, Intellectual Asset Management Magazine listed Ms. Knowles among the top fifty key individuals, companies and institutions that have shaped the IP marketplace in the last eight years. Ms. Knowles is also listed in the IAM 250 “World’s Leading IP Strategists,” published by IAM Magazine in 2011, the IAM 300 “World’s Leading IP Strategists,” published by IAM Magazine in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 as well as the IAM 1000 “World’s Leading Patent Professionals” in 2015, 2016 and 2017. She was also included in the list of Top 250 Women in IP by Managing IP Magazine in 2014, Managing IP’s 2016 and 2017 list of “IP Stars”.

Ms. Knowles was Chair of the IP Subcommittee of PhRMA in 2008, and Chair Emeritus of the PhRMA IP Subcommittees in 2009 and 2010.  From 2006-2010, she was a member of InterPat, which is the association of Chief Patent Counsels of the major pharmaceutical companies, and from 2008-2010 was a member of the Executive Committee of InterPat. She was the Chair of the work stream on data exclusivity for InterPat from 2006-2010.

Recent Articles by Sherry Knowles

USPTO Steps in for Congress in Attempt to Legislate on Terminal Disclaimers

By now, you are aware that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on May 10, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 40439), that would dramatically alter patent applicant and patentee statutory rights in their patent filings by proposing a draconian change to the requirements for submission of a terminal disclaimer (TD). Several blogs, including IPWatchdog, have reported on it. Comments are due by July 10, 2024.

A Comment on In re Cellect: The Patent Bar Must Push for Eliminating ODP Altogether, Not Interpreting it More Favorably

In an IPWatchDog post of September 6, 2022, Anthony Prosser and I traced the history of the doctrine of “Non-Statutory Judicially Created Obviousness-Type Double Patenting” (ODP). We confirmed (as its name indicates) that no Congressional statute has ever codified this doctrine. It is ultra vires because Congress has the sole right to create patent law…. In the Cellect decision issued yesterday, the Federal Circuit stretches the word “disclaimer” in Section154(b)(2)(B) beyond credibility as justification for the ODP doctrine itself and assumes that is what Congress was talking about without actually saying it (stating with agreement that “The Board also reasoned that terminal disclaimers arise almost exclusively in situations to overcome ODP rejections, and so Congress, by addressing terminal disclaimers in §154, effectively addresses ODP”).

Upcoming Events with Sherry Knowles

Life Sciences Masters™ 2024

October 28 - October 30, 2024

Past Events with Sherry Knowles