Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.
Established In 1920 - Predecessor Parent
Size of Organization: 86
Year Established: 1920Web Site: http://www.bannerwitcoff.com
|Profile Visibility |
#635 in weekly profile views out of 280,124 total law firms Overall
|Patent, Trademark, Copyright and Unfair Competition||Trademark, Copyright, and Unfair Competition|
Banner & Witcoff, Ltd. is dedicated to the practice of intellectual property law. The firm provides legal representation in obtaining, commercializing and litigating intellectual property rights in the United States and abroad. The practice includes counseling on the availability, validity and enforcement of intellectual property rights; patent interference proceedings; trademark opposition and cancellation proceedings; domestic and foreign patent and trademark prosecution; custom seizures of infringing products; and litigating patent, trademark and copyright infringement cases. Firm members have experience in both jury and bench trials in the Federal Courts and in proceedings before the International Trade Commission. Firm attorneys practice in all technologies, including the electrical, mechanical and chemical arts as well as computer hardware and software, internet and e-commerce, and biotechnology.
Martindale-Hubbell has augmented a firm's provided information with third-party sourced data to present a more comprehensive overview of the firm's expertise:
U.S. Federal Litigation Activity
Highest number of cases by Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.:
Intellectual Property (66 cases in past two years)
U.S. Patent Activity
Total number of U.S. granted patents by Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.:
2578 (in past two years)
Peer Review Ratings
Total number of Peer Review Rated lawyers of Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.:
Documents by Banner & Witcoff, Ltd. on Martindale.com
Don't Try to Barnstorm Proof of Printed Publication
H. Wayne Porter, October 22, 2014
The PTAB recently denied institution of inter partes review based on a petitioner’s failure to prove that a document was indeed a printed publication qualifying as prior art to the patent at issue.
To Stay or Not to Stay...
Katie L. Becker, October 22, 2014
The Federal Circuit recently decided its second case on the issue of staying a district court patent infringement litigation pending Covered Business Method (CBM) review. In Benefit Funding Systems v. Advance America Cash, Case No. 2014-1122 (Fed Cir. Sept. 25, 2014), the Federal Circuit affirmed...