Principal / Twin Cities / 612-337-2569
hawkins@fr.com

Michael Hawkins

Michael T. Hawkins is a Principal in the Twin Cities office of Fish & Richardson. His practice emphasizes US and foreign patent portfolio strategy and management, patent reexaminations/post-grant proceedings, patentability analysis, clearance investigations, intellectual property licensing and agreements, due diligence investigations, and pre-suit investigations. His work also focuses on strategic counseling for emerging companies to develop a comprehensive approach to intellectual property, such as conducting freedom-to-operate studies, obtaining patent protection in the United States and abroad, and planning defensive and offensive strategies. In addition, he is a specialist in patent reexaminations/inter partes reviews/post-grant proceedings, representing both patent owners and third party challengers in numerous proceedings.

Education

J.D., University of Minnesota Law School 2004
Managing Editor, Minnesota Law Review
magna cum laude


B.S., University of Minnesota 2000
Mechanical Engineering
with high distinction

Admissions

  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2015
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 2005
  • Minnesota 2004

 

OTHER DISTINCTIONS

Selected Publications and Mentions

Named in Law360, “PTAB Invalidates Claims In Polaris ATV Patent” (January 31, 2017).

Named in Law360, “Fed. Circ. Backs Google, Samsung PTAB Win On Graphics IP” (November 29, 2016).

Named in Law360, “Apple, Google, Samsung Get Mapping Patent Win At PTAB” (September 21, 2016).

Named in Law360, “Arctic Cat Wins Ax of Rival’s ATV Patent Claims at PTAB” (February 4, 2016).

Named in Law360, “Google, Samsung Get Graphics Patents Axed in AIA Review” (June 17, 2015).

Quoted in Daily Journal, “Apple, Samsung, Lead Charge to Kill Infringement Lawsuits by Going to Patent Office” (June 4, 2015).

Named in Law360, “Google, Samsung Get Another Micrografx Patent Axed” (July 22, 2015).

Named in Law360, “PTAB Nixes Warsaw Spine Implant Patent in AIA Review” (December 22, 2014).

“Implementing Strategies for an Offensive Patent Portfolio,” Journal of Industrial Biotechnology, Vol. 6, No. 3 (2010) pp. 141-43.

“Prosecution Laches in the Wake of Symbol Technologies: What is ‘Unreasonable and Unexplained’ Delay?” 87 Minn. L. Rev. 1621 (2003).

 

Awards

Recognized as a “Rising Star” by Super Lawyers Magazine (Minnesota 2016).

Recognized as “Up & Coming Lawyer” by Minnesota Lawyer (2013).

 

Experience

Post-Grant Proceedings

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00559

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00537

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00536

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00535

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00534

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00533

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00532

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00530

Google Inc. v. Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC, IPR2017-00529

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR2017-00455

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR2017-00433

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR2017-00199

Google Inc. v. Makor Issues, IPR2016-01537

Google Inc. v. Makor Issues, IPR2016-01536

Google Inc. v. Makor Issues, IPR2016-01535

Google Inc. v. Klaustech, IAG., CBM2016-00096

Microsoft Corporation v. Corel Software, LLC, IPR2016-01300

Microsoft Corporation v. Corel Software, LLC, IPR2016-01086

Microsoft Corporation v. Corel Software, LLC, IPR2016-01085

Microsoft Corporation v. Corel Software, LLC, IPR2016-01084

Microsoft Corporation v. Corel Software, LLC, IPR2016-01083

Google Inc. v. Porto Technology Co. Ltd., IPR2016-00045

Google Inc. v. Porto Technology Co. Ltd., IPR2016-00022

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR2015-01789

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR2015-01788

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR2015-01783

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR2015-01781

Google Inc. et al. v. American Navigational Systems, Inc., IPR2015-00851

Google Inc. et al. v. American Navigational Systems, Inc., IPR2015-00849

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR Case No. IPR2014-01427

Arctic Cat Inc. v. Polaris Industries Inc., IPR Case No. IPR2014-01428

Google Inc. v. Visual Real Estate, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR2014-01338

Google Inc. v. Visual Real Estate, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR2014-01339

Google Inc. v. Visual Real Estate, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR2014-01340

Google Inc. v. Visual Real Estate, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR2014-01341

Google Inc. v. MicroGrafx LLC, IPR Case No. IPR2014-00532

Google Inc. v. MicroGrafx LLC, IPR Case No. IPR2014-00533

Google Inc. v. MicroGrafx LLC, IPR Case No. IPR2014-00534

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300208

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300206

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300395

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300396

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300504

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300506

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300487

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-201300507

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR-2013-00508

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00034

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00035

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00071

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00073

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00074

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00075

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00076

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00081

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00087

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. v. Wasica Finance GMBH et. al., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00295

Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. v. Wasica Finance GMBH et. al., IPR Case No. IPR2014-01454

Schrader Int’l, Inc. et. al. v. Wasica Finance GMBH et. al., IPR Case No. IPR 2014-00476

Schrader Int’l, Inc. et. al. v. Wasica Finance GMBH et. al., IPR Case No. IPR2015-00272

Reexamination Proceedings
Google Inc. v. Intertainer, Inc., Control No. 95/000,313

Google Inc. v. Streetspace, Inc., Control No. 95/001,763

Requester v. Klaustech, Inc., Control No. 90/011,303

Requester v. Suffolk Technologies LLC, Control No. 90/012,714

Requester v. Suffolk Technologies LLC, Control No. 90/012,427

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., Control No. 95/000,451

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., Control No. 95/000,449

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., Control No. 95/000,448

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., Control No. 95/000,446

NuVasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., Control No. 95/002,346

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., Control No. 95/001,247

Medtronic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc., Control No. 95/001,202

Nest Labs, Inc. v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., Control No. 95/002,040

Nest Labs, Inc. v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., Control No. 95/002,041

USTC LLC v. Horian, Control No. 95/000,134

Kwiktwist Int’l, Inc. v. Handle It LLC, Control No. 90/007,077 (power of attorney after close of prosecution)

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Fill out the form below to receive our monthly newsletter and updates on your selected areas of interest. You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of the email.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.