Alexander B. Stein

For petitioners and patent owners alike, Alex has helped deliver successful results in post-grant proceedings. Alex leverages these successes to deliver business-focused counsel to his active patent-prosecution practice. He has helped draft—and successfully prosecute to allowance—hundreds of patent applications in diverse technical areas, including artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, extended-reality devices and interaction paradigms, wireless-power delivery systems, biopotential-signal processing and control systems, graphics processing, and many others.

While in law school, Alex worked in the intellectual property department for a global provider of data storage, virtualization, and cloud computing services, where he prepared and prosecuted patent applications, evaluated products for compliance with open-source licenses, and helped defend against patent-infringement allegations. Before practicing law, he worked as a senior software engineer in the medical device industry designing, implementing, and automatically testing complex end-to-end systems for remotely monitoring patients with implanted pacemaker or defibrillator devices. Alex leverages these industry experiences to understand complex technologies quickly, explain those technologies in understandable terms to a variety of stakeholders, and to provide reasoned counsel that aligns with business objectives.

During law school, Alex served as the executive articles editor of the Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review. For his third year of law school, he attended Stanford Law School as a visiting J.D. student, earning the Gerald Gunther Prize for extraordinary performance in Intellectual Property: International.

• Invalidated all challenged claims on behalf of a large electronics company in a complex inter partes review (IPR) proceeding that involved novel issues concerning the participation rights of a joinder petitioner, resulting in a favorable precedential decision on appeal
• Petitioned the USPTO to rescind a reexamination order based on novel theories related to the scope of estoppel after an earlier IPR proceeding
• Secured denial of institution in multiple IPR proceedings on behalf of an industrial designer
• Invalidated all challenged claims on behalf of an oil and gas company in a post-grant review proceeding and defended the same client in an IPR proceeding, securing a favorable ruling as to patentability of asserted claims
• Persuaded the PTAB to deny IPR institution on behalf of a major access-control company, including after a remand following a Director Review decision, which allowed the patent to survive and be used in district court to secure a multimillion-dollar jury verdict
• Persuaded the reexamination branch of the USPTO to confirm patentability for multiple standard-essential video codec-related patents