Photo of Patrick Niedermeier

Patrick J. Niedermeier is Patent Counsel in the Litigation Department and Intellectual Property Group.

Patrick represents clients from large corporations to start-up entities before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He is experienced in all phases of patent prosecution, including accelerated examination, provisional filings, continuation practice, appeal briefing, design patents and foreign patent strategy. He also has prosecuted several trademark filings to registration.

In addition, Patrick assists clients in obtaining and enforcing intellectual property rights both in the U.S. and abroad. He represents corporate clients throughout the complex patent litigation process, including pre-suit investigations and client counseling; negotiating discovery disputes; drafting claim construction, summary judgment, expert, and pre- and post-trial briefs; assisting with trial preparation; and participating at trial. He also has assisted with preparing appellate briefs for submission to the Federal Circuit.

Patrick’s work spans a broad range of technology sectors that include network security, wireless communications, telecommunications and telephony devices, video conferencing, mobile computing, weather and greenhouse gas instruments, optical discs, video compression and on-demand streaming, 3D image processing, machine vision, RFID/NFC technology and financial services software, as well as life insurance annuity products.


In addition to litigation and prosecution matters, Patrick is highly experienced in leading intellectual property due diligence review for large-scale corporate transactions. He regularly advises clients on intellectual property portfolio management and development including legal opinion work, and performs patent landscape and freedom- to-operate analyses.

Patrick also has written several articles for Proskauer’s New England IP Blog on various patent litigation and prosecution topics.

While at Boston College Law School, Patrick served as a legal intern to the Honorable Robert B. Collings, Magistrate Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Prior to that, he was an IT Specialist at IBM Global Services and a software engineer and enterprise database administrator at New England Confectionery Co.

In Univ. of Strathclyde v. Clear-Vu Lighting LLC, the Federal Circuit grappled with the issue of whether claims directed to methods and systems for inactivating bacteria using blue light were obvious in view of a prior art combination that taught the claimed elements but lacked an indication of success. Ultimately, the Federal Circuit found that the patent’s success where the prior art failed – inactivation of the bacteria without a photosensitizer did not support a finding of obviousness.
Continue Reading When (Patent) Success Isn’t Obvious

Nearly seven years after the landmark Supreme Court decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, subject matter eligibility for patent claims under 35 U.S.C § 101 remains a moving target. In Alice, the Court found claims for a computerized escrow arrangement ineligible for patenting because they were directed to the abstract idea of “intermediated settlement” and did not recite an inventive concept that could impart eligibility under Section 101. While the Alice case focused on a software invention, a few recent lower court decisions suggest that, in certain circumstances, medical device patents may not be immune from similar patent eligibility challenges.

Continue Reading Federal Circuit Invalidates Device Patent As Directed to an Abstract Idea