University of Texas Law logo Update your account
  • Sign in or Join Account and Briefcase
    Not a member yet? Sign up Forgot password?
  • Accredited CLE
    Live Conferences Studio Webcasts eConferences eCourses Hooked on CLE Answer Bar
  • Research & Self-Study
    Materials eLibrary
  • Subscriptions
    MCLE On-Demand and eLibrary
  • Browse by Practice Area
    Administrative Admiralty and Maritime Alternative Dispute Resolution Appellate - Civil and Criminal Bankruptcy Business Entities Civil Rights Construction Corporate Counsel Criminal Cybersecurity Elder Law and Guardianship Employment Entertainment and Sports Law Environmental Essentials Ethics Exempt Organizations / Nonprofits Family Government Enforcement / White Collar Crime Healthcare Immigration Insurance Intellectual Property / Patent Law International Law Practice Management Litigation M&A and Securities Oil, Gas and Energy Practice Skills Real Estate Renewable Energy School Self-Care Taxation Technology Technology for Lawyers Trusts and Estates / Probate Water
  • Search
  • Shopping Cart

What are you searching for?

Skip to main content
UT Law CLE logo
  • Overview /
  • Schedule /
  • Faculty /
  • Credit Info /
  • Key Dates /
  • Venue /
  • Sponsors
Register or Buy ticket icon Buy
Presented by
The Stanford Program in Law, Science & Technology
Berkeley Center for Law & Technology at UC Berkeley
The University of Texas School of Law

MAJOR SPONSOR
Navigant Consulting, Inc.

LUNCHEON SPONSORS
Hickman Palermo Truong Becker Bingham Wong LLP
Inflexion Point Strategy, LLC

SPONSORS
Covington & Burling LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Haynes and Boone, LLP
Latham & Watkins LLP
WilmerHale

Conference art
Artwork Details

13th Annual

Advanced Patent Law Institute

Palo Alto, CA Dec 6-7, 2012 Four Seasons Hotel
Conference Concluded
Buy
Related products: Materials
Brochure thumbnail
Download Brochure (PDF)

Overview

Join a nationally recognized faculty of leading district judges, academia, patent prosecution, litigation experts and senior IP counsel from major corporations such as Twitter, Netflix and Google, in the heart of Silicon Valley for Advanced Patent Law Institute. This year's program takes an in-depth look at winning strategies for prosecuting and litigating patents, with a special focus on the America Invents Act.

2012 Institute highlights:


  • Post-Grant Practice and Inter Partes Reviews Under the American Invents Act with Chief Judge James Smith, USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

  • Strategies for claims drafting, claim construction, and functional claiming

  • Effects of recent litigation and regulation on inequitable conduct, infringement, inducement, privilege, damages calculations, patentable subject matter and standard-essential patents

  • U.S. District Judges panel discussion of cutting edge patent litigation issues

  • Coordinating International Litigation: Focus on German Patent Enforcement discusses multi-national perspectives on drivers of international patent litigation and strategies for handling different countries' legal requirements

  • Special sessions on strategic portfolio management, strategies to foster innovation while curbing offensive litigation and management of litigation involving multiple lawsuits, districts or defendants

The Institute is one of three Advanced Patent Law Institutes presented by The University of Texas School of Law, each uniquely tailored to its locale. This event is jointly presented with The Stanford Program in Law, Science & Technology and the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology at UC Berkeley.

  • Buy

Event Schedule

Program is subject to change.
All times are Central Time Zone.

  • Day 1 December 6, 2012
  • Day 2 December 7, 2012
  • Time
    Credit
    Subject
    Speaker
  • Thursday Morning, Dec. 6, 2012
    Presiding Officer:
    Robert Barr, Berkeley Center for Law & Technology - Berkeley, CA
  • 7:30 am
    Registration Opens
    Includes continental breakfast.

  • 8:20 am
    Welcoming Remarks

  • 8:30 am
    0.50 hr
    Claims Drafting Strategies
    Too often, applicants prosecute patent applications without adequately considering how the claims will be asserted in litigation. A consideration of the latest case law concerning claim format—whether the patentee can proceed on a theory of direct, induced, or contributory infringement, or whether a patentee must proceed on a theory of divided infringement. This session demonstrates ways these theories are litigated, how they affect discovery and litigation cost, and how they can even mean the difference between victory and failure.  More importantly, strategies to avoid the typical claim-format pitfalls are discussed.

    Erik R. Puknys, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP - Palo Alto, CA

  • 9:00 am
    0.50 hr
    Claim Construction: Methodologies of Construction
    A discussion of the growing divide between two basic modes of claim construction emerging from Federal Circuit case law, the current trends in the methodological divide, how the judges split on claim construction and how to think about this.

    R. Polk Wagner, University of Pennsylvania School of Law - Philadelphia, PA

  • 9:30 am
    0.50 hr
    After the Ides of March—Prosecution Strategies Surrounding the March 16 First-to-File Transition
    To file or not to file, that is the question. Beginning with a quick review of the differences between the pre- and post-March 16 prior art rules, this discussion focuses on the decision of whether to accelerate filings to take advantage of the pre-March 16 rules and also addresses how prosecution practice may, or may not, change post-March 16.

    Michael W. Farn, Fenwick & West LLP - Mountain View, CA

  • 10:00 am
    Break

  • 10:15 am
    0.50 hr ethics
    Malpractice Risks of the First-to-File System and the America Invents Act
    The transition from "first-to-invent" to "first-to-file" and other changes under the APA present multiple ethics issues for practitioners, including identifying the more favorable regime as the March 2013 change-over approaches, balancing the "need for speed" with proper drafting practices under the new regime, and reconciling duties to the PTO with client desires now that best mode is no longer a litigation defense.

    Ragesh K. Tangri, Durie Tangri LLP - San Francisco, CA

  • 10:45 am
    1.00 hr
    Post-Grant Practice and Inter Partes Reviews under the America Invents Act
    With the new rules on post-grant proceedings now in place, the impact and practice considerations of these new rules from the Office, district court and USITC perspectives are reviewed. A look at strategies and tactics for choice of a validity challenge in the Office, the district court or USITC, and the possible scenarios involving parallel validity proceedings. Timelines, representative costs and chances of success are discussed under the new proceedings, along with the views from the Board now that the new proceedings have become operational.

    Moderator:
    David L. McCombs, Haynes and Boone, LLP - Dallas, TX
    Panelists:
    Rajiv P. Patel, Fenwick & West LLP - Mountain View, CA
    Panelists:
    Hon. James Smith, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office - Alexandria, VA
    Panelists:
    Robert Greene Sterne, Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox - Washington, DC

  • 11:45 am
    0.75 hr
    Patentable Subject Matter
    An analysis of how Prometheus will affect personalized medicine and the Myriad case, the implications of Prometheus for software patents, and where Section 101 considerations fit in the prosecution and litigation process.  

    Moderator:
    Edward R. Reines, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP - Redwood City, CA
    Panelists:
    Daralyn J. Durie, Durie Tangri LLP - San Francisco, CA
    Panelists:
    Lee Van Pelt, Van Pelt, Yi & James LLP - Cupertino, CA

  • 12:30 pm
    Break to Pick Up Lunch
    Included in conference registration fee.

  • Thursday Afternoon, Dec. 6, 2012
    Presiding Officer:
    James Pampinella, Navigant Consulting, Inc. - San Francisco, CA
  • LUNCHEON PRESENTATION
    Sponsored by Hickman Palermo Truong Becker Bingham Wong LLP

  • 12:45 pm
    1.00 hr
    Essential Questions About Standard-Essential Patents
    Patents that are considered essential to industry standards raise special concerns. A look at several issues that have been the subject of recent debate in legislative and administrative bodies and litigation in the courts such as proving—and defending against—claims of infringement, the duty of disclosure to standards bodies and when the duty arises, the duty to license on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and related disagreements about the availability of injunctive relief, and transfers of standard-essential patents which can involve questions of both contract and competition law. 

    Moderator:
    Stanley Young, Covington & Burling LLP - Redwood City, CA
    Panelists:
    Matthew Bye, Google Inc. - Mountain View, CA
    Panelists:
    Mark D. Flanagan, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP - Palo Alto, CA
    Panelists:
    Andrew N. Thomases, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP - Palo Alto, CA

  • 1:45 pm
    Break

  • 2:00 pm
    0.50 hr ethics
    Privilege: Don't Believe Everything You Think
    Recent decisions on various types of privilege have surprised many practitioners. An analysis of several fluid areas of privilege law, such as whether mediation or settlement privilege exist, how (not) to establish a relationship with a third party that supports the attorney-client privilege, and privilege surprises when you leave the cozy confines of the United States.

    Karen Boyd, Turner Boyd LLP - Mountain View, CA

  • 2:30 pm
    1.00 hr
    What is That Patent Really Worth? Courts Take a Hard Look at the "Reasonable Royalty" Calculation
    The Federal Circuit and district courts have recently begun requiring experts to link reasonable royalty calculations to real-world facts related to the specific invention—e.g. Apple v. Motorola. Courts are also taking a close look at what facts are admitted into evidence, excluding sales data (Uniloc) and license data (ResQnet) that were employed erroneously to "drive up" the royalty rate.  These cases do not always make clear whether it is the expert's method or data that should be excluded. The need for better methods and better data is especially strong in the case of complex products, which may embody hundreds of patents. This panel examines recent cases and discusses new economic methods that hold promise for satisfying the new standards that have emerged in them. 

    Moderator:
    Julie M. Holloway, Latham & Watkins LLP - San Francisco, CA
    Panelists:
    Eugene M. Paige, Keker & Van Nest LLP - San Francisco, CA
    Panelists:
    Jonathan D. Putnam, Competition Dynamics - Salem, MA

  • 3:30 pm
    Break

  • 3:45 pm
    0.75 hr
    Managing Patent Cases in the Era of Misjoinder, Multidistrict Litigation, and Multinational Litigation
    A discussion of the latest developments in management of multiple lawsuits involving the same patent or set of patents, the growth of multidistrict litigation as an option in multi-defendant cases, the influence of AIA as well as In re EMC on such cases, the developments of Rule 42 consolidation after misjoinder under Rule 20 is found and the challenges of coordinating domestic and international litigation.

    David S. Bloch, Winston & Strawn LLP - San Francisco, CA
    Michael F. Heafey, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP - Menlo Park, CA

  • 4:30 pm
    1.00 hr
    0.50 hr ethics
    Judicial Panel
    Leading District Court judges discuss cutting-edge patent litigation issues.

    Moderator:
    Thomas M. Melsheimer, Fish & Richardson P.C. - Dallas, TX
    Panelists:
    Hon. J. Rodney Gilstrap, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas - Marshall, TX
    Panelists:
    Hon. Roy Payne, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas - Marshall, TX
    Panelists:
    Hon. Ronald M. Whyte, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California - San Jose, CA

  • 5:30 pm
    Adjourn

  • Time
    Credit
    Subject
    Speaker
  • Friday Morning, Dec. 7, 2012
    Presiding Officer:
    Ron Laurie, Palo Alto, CA
  • 8:00 am
    Conference Room Opens
    Includes continental breakfast.

  • 8:30 am
    0.50 hr
    Functional Claiming
    Software patents are often claimed in functional terms, even if they don't use means-plus-function language.  An in-depth look at the perils—and promise—of functional claiming in software.
     

    Mark A. Lemley, Stanford Law School - Stanford, CA

  • 9:00 am
    1.00 hr
    Coordinating International Litigation: Focus on German Patent Enforcement
    An overview of international patent litigation that focuses on German patent litigation and the Pan-European perspective such as the smartphone wars and what drives litigations in certain forums and countries. Learn strategies for handling substantive legal differences and comparing limits on discovery, duration of trials, bifurcation of issues, arbitration and mediation and remedies.

    Moderator:
    Yar R. Chaikovsky, McDermott Will & Emery - Menlo Park, CA
    Panelists:
    David L. Cohen, Vringo Inc. - New York, NY
    Panelists:
    Alexander Harguth, McDermott Will & Emery - München , Germany
    Panelists:
    Ari Laakkonen, Powell Gilbert LLP - London, United Kingdom

  • 10:00 am
    Break

  • 10:15 am
    1.00 hr
    Strategic Portfolio Management
    Experts in strategic portfolio management discuss key issues and insightful thinking processes involved in adapting to sweeping AIA changes and critical case law, the increasing internationalization of patent activity and the increasing "make-versus-buy" trade-offs of the patent marketplace. Learn how to keep up with accelerating technological change and the pace of R&D, and how to address constant management and budget challenges.

    Moderator:
    Christopher J. Byrne, San Jose, CA
    Panelists:
    T.J. Angioletti, Netflix, Inc. - Los Gatos, CA
    Panelists:
    Sandeep Jaggi, Intermolecular, Inc. - San Jose, CA
    Panelists:
    Philip L. McGarrigle, Jazz Pharmaceuticals - Palo Alto, CA

  • 11:15 am
    0.75 hr
    Emerging Developments at the ITC:  Domestic Industry and Remedies
    The International Trade Commission's surge in popularity continues to make it a favored forum for bringing patent disputes. Over the past year, Congress and the Commission have closely considered who should be allowed to bring a patent case and what remedies the ITC should award. Evolving domestic industry requirements for obtaining relief in ITC cases along with emerging ITC remedies issues are reviewed from a policy and legal standpoint.  Hear a Q&A discussion of the substantive law, developments in the ITC's Rules and Procedures and the politics of the ITC.

    Colleen Chien, Santa Clara University - Santa Clara, CA
    Eric R. Lamison, Kirkland & Ellis LLP - San Francisco, CA

  • 12:00 pm
    Break to Pick Up Lunch
    Included in conference registration fee.

  • Friday Afternoon, Dec. 7, 2012
    Presiding Officer:
    Vernon M. Winters, San Francisco, CA
  • LUNCHEON PRESENTATION
    Sponsored by Inflexion Point Strategy, LLC

  • 12:20 pm
    0.75 hr
    New Approaches to Patent Strategy and to Dealing with Inventors
    A look at new ways of dealing with innovators and innovation, including strategies that may foster invention disclosures and curb offensive patent litigation. The panel discusses the merits of Twitter’s proposed patent assignment—the Innovator's Patent Agreement (IPA)—that allows inventors to limit the offensive use of their patents, and the Defensive Patent License (DPL) that protects innovators by networking patents into mutually beneficial legal shields. The interplay of these strategies with recent USPTO rule changes to implement the Inventor’s Oath or Declaration provisions of the America Invents Act is addressed.

    Moderator:
    Bradley Baugh, North Weber & Baugh LLP - Palo Alto, CA
    Panelists:
    Benjamin Lee, Twitter, Inc. - San Francisco, CA
    Panelists:
    Jennifer M. Urban, UC Berkeley School of Law - Berkeley, CA

  • 1:05 pm
    Break

  • 1:15 pm
    0.50 hr
    Joint/Divided Infringement
    After en banc rehearing by a divided court, the Federal Circuit, in Akamai and McKesson, serves up new indirect infringement doctrines that obviate requirements for predicate direct infringement liability in 271(b) inducement cases. How will the new doctrines affect claiming strategies and infringement litigation? Will the doctrines survive scrutiny of the Supreme Court?

    David W. O'Brien, Zagorin O'Brien Graham LLP - Austin, TX

  • 1:45 pm
    0.50 hr ethics
    Inequitable Conduct after Therasense: All Clear?
    A look at how the law of inequitable conduct has been reconfigured by the Federal Circuit's 2011 decision in Therasense and how courts analyze the requirement of "but-for" materiality. What does it mean to have acted with "intent to deceive" in a hypothetical, but-for world? The interplay between the new law of inequitable conduct and related doctrines, such as Walker Process antitrust claims, is discussed along with the PTO response to Therasense, including the revisions to PTO Rule 56(a).

    Robert J. Goldman, Ropes & Gray, LLP - East Palo Alto, CA

  • 2:15 pm
    0.50 hr
    Inducement
    Hot topics in inducement law, including divided infringement scenarios after Akamai, the interplay between inducement's intent requirement and willfulness, and the risks and rewards of opinion letters in combating inducement allegations.

    Jeffrey G. Homrig, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP - Redwood City, CA

  • 2:45 pm
    0.50 hr
    To Plead or Not to Plead
    A look at the murky landscape of pleading standards for infringement and invalidity between Twombly/Iqbal, Form 18 and all of the varying court opinions in between.

    Jeannine Yoo Sano, White & Case LLP - Palo Alto, CA
    Bijal V. Vakil, White & Case LLP - Palo Alto, CA

  • 3:15 pm
    Adjourn

  • Day 1 December 6, 2012
  • Day 2 December 7, 2012
Download Schedule

Conference Faculty

T.J. Angioletti

Netflix, Inc.
Los Gatos, CA

Bradley Baugh

North Weber & Baugh LLP
Palo Alto, CA

David S. Bloch

Winston & Strawn LLP
San Francisco, CA

Karen Boyd

Turner Boyd LLP
Mountain View, CA

Matthew Bye

Google Inc.
Mountain View, CA

Christopher J. Byrne

San Jose, CA

Yar R. Chaikovsky

McDermott Will & Emery
Menlo Park, CA

Colleen Chien

Santa Clara University
Santa Clara, CA

David L. Cohen

Vringo Inc.
New York, NY

Daralyn J. Durie

Durie Tangri LLP
San Francisco, CA

Michael W. Farn

Fenwick & West LLP
Mountain View, CA

Mark D. Flanagan

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Hon. J. Rodney Gilstrap

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas
Marshall, TX

Robert J. Goldman

Ropes & Gray, LLP
East Palo Alto, CA

Alexander Harguth

McDermott Will & Emery
München , Germany

Michael F. Heafey

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Menlo Park, CA

Julie M. Holloway

Latham & Watkins LLP
San Francisco, CA

Jeffrey G. Homrig

Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP
Redwood City, CA

Sandeep Jaggi

Intermolecular, Inc.
San Jose, CA

Ari Laakkonen

Powell Gilbert LLP
London, United Kingdom

Eric R. Lamison

Kirkland & Ellis LLP
San Francisco, CA

Benjamin Lee

Twitter, Inc.
San Francisco, CA

Mark A. Lemley

Stanford Law School
Stanford, CA

David L. McCombs

Haynes and Boone, LLP
Dallas, TX

Philip L. McGarrigle

Jazz Pharmaceuticals
Palo Alto, CA

Thomas M. Melsheimer

Fish & Richardson P.C.
Dallas, TX

David W. O'Brien

Zagorin O'Brien Graham LLP
Austin, TX

Eugene M. Paige

Keker & Van Nest LLP
San Francisco, CA

Rajiv P. Patel

Fenwick & West LLP
Mountain View, CA

Hon. Roy Payne

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas
Marshall, TX

Erik R. Puknys

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Jonathan D. Putnam

Competition Dynamics
Salem, MA

Edward R. Reines

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Redwood City, CA

Jeannine Yoo Sano

White & Case LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Hon. James Smith

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Alexandria, VA

Robert Greene Sterne

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox
Washington, DC

Ragesh K. Tangri

Durie Tangri LLP
San Francisco, CA

Andrew N. Thomases

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Jennifer M. Urban

UC Berkeley School of Law
Berkeley, CA

Bijal V. Vakil

White & Case LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Lee Van Pelt

Van Pelt, Yi & James LLP
Cupertino, CA

R. Polk Wagner

University of Pennsylvania School of Law
Philadelphia, PA

Hon. Ronald M. Whyte

U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
San Jose, CA

Stanley Young

Covington & Burling LLP
Redwood City, CA

Planning Committee

Robert Barr—Co-Chair

Berkeley Center for Law & Technology
Berkeley, CA

Mark A. Lemley—Co-Chair

Stanford Law School
Stanford, CA

Bradley Baugh

North Weber & Baugh LLP
Palo Alto, CA

David S. Bloch

Winston & Strawn LLP
San Francisco, CA

Karen Boyd

Turner Boyd LLP
Mountain View, CA

Christopher J. Byrne

San Jose, CA

Yar R. Chaikovsky

McDermott Will & Emery
Menlo Park, CA

I. Neel Chatterjee

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Menlo Park, CA

Colleen Chien

Santa Clara University
Santa Clara, CA

Daralyn J. Durie

Durie Tangri LLP
San Francisco, CA

Michael W. Farn

Fenwick & West LLP
Mountain View, CA

Mark D. Flanagan

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
Palo Alto, CA

William S. Galliani

Cooley LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Robert J. Goldman

Ropes & Gray, LLP
East Palo Alto, CA

Julie M. Holloway

Latham & Watkins LLP
San Francisco, CA

Jeffrey G. Homrig

Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP
Redwood City, CA

Kenneth Korea

Samsung Information Systems America
San Jose, CA

Eric R. Lamison

Kirkland & Ellis LLP
San Francisco, CA

Dan H. Lang

Cisco Systems, Inc.
San Jose, CA

Ron Laurie

Palo Alto, CA

Katherine Kelly Lutton

Fish & Richardson P.C.
Redwood City, CA

David L. McCombs

Haynes and Boone, LLP
Dallas, TX

Christopher J. Palermo

Hickman Palermo Truong & Becker LLP
San Jose, CA

Rajiv P. Patel

Fenwick & West LLP
Mountain View, CA

Edward R. Reines

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Redwood City, CA

Jeannine Yoo Sano

White & Case LLP
Palo Alto, CA

David M. Simon

Santa Clara, CA

Andrew N. Thomases

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Lee Van Pelt

Van Pelt, Yi & James LLP
Cupertino, CA

Mallun Yen

RPX Corporation
San Francisco, CA

Stanley Young

Covington & Burling LLP
Redwood City, CA

Credit Info

  • Palo Alto, CA
MCLE Credit
Toggle view Texas – 14.00 hrs  |  2.00 hrs Ethics
You may claim your credit online in Your Briefcase, and UT Law CLE will report credit on your behalf to the State Bar of Texas. A Certificate of Attendance will be provided in Your Briefcase for your records. The system reports Texas CLE credit every Tuesday. If you are claiming credit in the last week of your birth month, self-report your CLE credit directly to the State Bar of Texas at texasbar.com, using the course number  provided on your certificate of attendance.
Toggle view California – 14.00 hrs  |  2.00 hrs Ethics
You must claim your credit online in Your Briefcase, and will then be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. UT Law CLE is required to provide the State Bar with electronic attendance records for any MCLE participatory activity within 60 days of completion of the activity. The California licensee is responsible for reporting their compliance/credit hours earned to the State Bar at the end of their reporting period directly to the State Bar of California at calbar.ca.gov.  UT Law CLE will maintain Attendance Records for four years.  
Other Credit
Toggle view TX Accounting CPE – 16.50 hrs
The University of Texas School of Law (Provider #250) live conferences are presumptively approved by The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy for Texas Accounting CPE credit based on a 50-minute credit hour. Approved for general CPE credit only.

At the conference, you are welcome to sign in on the Accounting CPE Record of Attendance form at the registration desk, but we are now reporting all credit online. You will receive a Texas Accounting Certificate of Completion in Your Briefcase. Self-report your CPE credit directly to TSBPA. UT Law CLE will maintain Attendance Records for four years.  

Contact us at accreditation@utcle.org if you have additional questions.

Key Dates

Palo Alto, CA – Dec 6-7, 2012 – Four Seasons Hotel
Conference Concluded
Buy
  • Palo Alto, CA
Standard Registration
Last day for $775.00 Regular pricing: Nov 28, 2012

$825.00 for registrations received after this time

Green Registration - USB Key ONLY
Last day for $770.00 Regular pricing: Nov 28, 2012

$820.00 for registrations received after this time

Last day for cancellation (full refund): Nov 30, 2012

$50 processing fee applied after this date

Last day for cancellation: Dec 3, 2012

Venue

speaker

Four Seasons Hotel

2050 University Avenue
Palo Alto, CA
(650) 566-1200 (reservations)

Accommodations

$275.00 good through Nov 5, 2012

Parking Information

Day of event complimentary self-parking; $12 valet.
Overnight self-parking $12; $22 overnight valet.

Our Sponsors

Thank you to our sponsors! Click each logo below to learn more.

  • Navigant Consulting, Inc. logo
    Navigant Consulting, Inc.
    Navigant (NYSE: NCI) is a specialized, global expert services firm dedicated to assisting clients in creating and protecting value in the face of critical business risks and opportunities. Through senior level engagement with clients, Navigant professionals combine technical expertise in Disputes and Investigations, Economics, Financial Advisory and Management Consulting, with business pragmatism in the highly regulated Construction, Energy, Financial Services and Healthcare industries to support clients in addressing their most critical business needs. www.navigantconsulting.com
  • Hickman Palermo Truong Becker Bingham Wong LLP logo
    Hickman Palermo Truong Becker Bingham Wong LLP
    Hickman Palermo is a 20-lawyer firm in San Jose focused on top-quality patents for computer technologies, consumer electronics, telecommunications and online services. Founded in 2000 by Silicon Valley veterans, the firm has one of the country's highest concentrations of patent attorneys and agents with backgrounds and industry experience in computer science and electrical engineering. Our partners and associates also have strong business sensibility, derived from prior positions as in-house counsel or as litigators. We have broad experience in inter partes reexamination, patent claim risk analysis, licensing and other transactions. When quality claims and great communication matter, contact us. www.hptb-law.com/
  • Inflexion Point Strategy, LLC logo
    Inflexion Point Strategy, LLC
    Inflexion Point Strategy, LLC was launched in 2004 as the first intellectual property investment bank. From its offices in Silicon Valley and Asia, Inflexion Point advises technology companies and institutional investors around the world in acquiring, divesting and investing in IP-rich companies, business units, technologies and strategic IP assets in the form of high-impact patent portfolios and related know-how. Inflexion Point's mission is to bring the unrealized value of IP assets to the bottom line by increasing corporate valuation in M&A transactions, by building a defensive shield against litigious competitors and by generating additional top-line revenue via creative exclusive field-of use licensing programs. www.ip-strategy.com
  • Covington & Burling LLP logo
    Covington & Burling LLP
    Covington & Burling LLP represents clients in cutting-edge intellectual property and other matters. In responding to the needs and challenges of our clients, our lawyers draw upon the firm's expertise and experience in a broad array of industries to provide solutions to difficult, complex, and novel problems and issues, whether in litigation, transactions, or regulatory proceedings. From our offices in Beijing, Brussels, London, New York, San Diego, San Francisco, Silicon Valley and Washington, DC, we practice as one firm, holding closely to core values that start with a deep commitment to our clients and the quality of our work on their behalf. Our lawyers are recognized nationally and internationally for their legal skills and the depth of their expertise. Because every client is a client of the firm, not of any specific lawyer, every client has the ability to call on any of our lawyers as needed. www.cov.com
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP logo
    Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
    With 375 intellectual property lawyers, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP is one of the largest intellectual property law firms in the world. From offices in the United States, Europe and Asia, the firm practices all aspects of patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret law, including counseling, prosecution, licensing and litigation. Finnegan has more than 45 years of experience assisting domestic and multinational companies successfully navigate U.S. intellectual property law and represents clients in virtually every business sector—consumer products, telecommunications, electronics, computer, Internet, biotechnology, pharmaceutical, chemical, alternative energy, medical device, healthcare IT, manufacturing, publishing and financial services—on IP issues related to international trade, portfolio management, Internet, e-commerce, government contracts, antitrust and unfair competition. www.finnegan.com/
  • Haynes and Boone, LLP logo
    Haynes and Boone, LLP
    Haynes and Boone is always on the leading edge in the practice of technology and intellectual property law. By utilizing a cooperative culture of teamwork the lawyers of Haynes and Boone pride themselves on providing innovative, effective and efficient answers to the problems facing technology-focused companies. In order to provide legal solutions tailored to each individual client our attorneys pride themselves on knowledge of their client's business and their industry. Not only do the majority of our intellectual property attorneys hold technical degrees, a number of them possess practical experience working as engineers in areas such as software development, telecommunications and semiconductors to name just a few. Whether a client needs guidance in structuring a technology transfer agreement, developing effective patent protection strategies or protecting their trademarks worldwide, Haynes and Boone has the attorneys to guide them. An international corporate law firm, Haynes and Boone has more than 550 attorneys based in 12 offices throughout the world. www.haynesboone.com
  • Latham & Watkins LLP logo
    Latham & Watkins LLP
    Founded in 1934, Latham & Watkins has grown into a full-service international powerhouse with more than 2,000 lawyers in 31 offices. With that growth, we have built internationally recognized practices in a wide spectrum of transactional, litigation and regulatory areas. More than 100 lawyers specialize in intellectual property and utilize Latham & Watkins' global platform and resources to consistently achieve outstanding results for our clients in many complex, precedent-setting intellectual property-related disputes spanning industries and jurisdictions. Latham & Watkins' Intellectual Property Litigation Group provides strategic intellectual property counsel to companies at all stages of growth, helping our clients to acquire, manage, license, develop, defend and assert intellectual property in all forms. Latham & Watkins' patent lawyers have vast experience with mediations, arbitrations and other forms of alternative dispute resolution, and frequently achieve successful results with these methods as an alternative to protracted and expensive litigation.
     www.lw.com
  • WilmerHale logo
    WilmerHale
    WilmerHale is a leading international law firm with more than 200 attorneys focused on intellectual property matters in the United States, Europe and Asia. Experienced in helping clients with IP needs at every stage of growth and in every aspect of their business, we offer full-service coverage in all aspects of patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret law, including prosecution, litigation, due diligence and opinions, and licensing and technology transfer. We have litigated hundreds of patent cases in federal district courts across the U.S. and the International Trade Commission, and have extensive experience in appellate matters before the Federal Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court. www.wilmerhale.com/
Download Sponsor Details Become a Sponsor
Become a Sponsor
Email UT Law CLE for more information on sponsoring an event.

Stay in the loop with UT Law CLE

Sign-Up Now  
Accredited CLE
Live Conferences
Studio Webcasts
eConferences
eCourses
Hooked on CLE
Answer Bar
Research & Self-Study
Materials
eLibrary

Subscriptions
MCLE On-Demand and eLibrary
Your UT Law CLE
Your Briefcase
Your Account
Your Cart
Sign In or Join
About
Scholarships
Sponsorships
Speakers
Texas Law Resources
UT Law CLE
About Us
Our Volunteers
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Security
Help & Contact
FAQ
Contact Us
Facebook    LinkedIn    Twitter    Youtube

© 2025 The University of Texas School of Law Continuing Legal Education | 512.475.6700 | Version 9.006

Back to top
More Information
Warning
Error
Warning
Please sign in to continue
Forgot Password   |  Create Account
Item has been added to your cart.

Item description

Checkout
Item has been added to your Briefcase.

Item description

Go to your Briefcase