21^st Annual

Advanced Patent Law Institute

Austin Nov 3-4, 2016 Four Seasons Hotel
Conference Concluded

Live Webcast Nov 3-4, 2016
Conference Concluded

Overview

UT Law's 21st Annual Advanced Patent Law Institute in Austin covers the latest developments in patent law and features a sophisticated and rich array of prosecution and litigation topics. Hear from nationally recognized faculty including senior IP counsel of major corporations, patent prosecution and litigation experts from around the nation, U.S. District Court Judges, and leading academics.

This year’s program features:

A review of recent Section 101 decisions their impact on shaping the Alice analysis; plus practical prosecution tips and strategies under the new USPTO guidelines
Tips and strategies for practicing before the PTAB, including new rules, best practices and current trends; plus insight and tips from the perspective of former Administrative Patent Judges;
An in-depth exploration of current “tensions” in concurrent proceedings before the PTAB and the District Courts; what litigators and patent owners should know and understand
Recent developments in claims construction, with a focus on the latest post-Teva Federal Circuit cases and the PTAB’s claims construction rules.
A continued look at the impact of Octane Fitness, including developing trends and common pitfalls
A discussion on the impact of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and the America Invents Act on the protection of technology.
A panel of In-House Counsel discuss the key issues around patent prosecution, litigation and licensing, the prospect of patent reform, and more.
Key patent licensing strategies, with emphasis on drafting and negotiation
The impact of Lexmark, Halo and Life Tech on overseas sales and recent developments in the law of patent exhaustion and foreign sales of products patented in the U.S
A special luncheon presentation with Hope C. Shimabuki, Regional Director of the U.S. Patent Trademark Office’s Texas Regional Office
Presentations by nationally-recognized academics—Mark A. Lemley, Stanford Law School; John M. Golden, The University of Texas School of Law; and David Hricik, Mercer University School of Law
Insight from sitting U.S. District Court Judges, including Judge Robert W. Schroeder III (EDTX) and Judge Roy Payne (EDTX) and from former Judge Faith S. Hochberg on the current landscape for damages and remedies and their experiences hearing patent cases
Plus, network with program faculty and fellow practitioners at a Thursday Evening Reception

Event Schedule

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

Day 1 November 3, 2016
Day 2 November 4, 2016

Time

Credit

Subject

Speaker
Thursday Morning, Nov. 3, 2016
Presiding Officer:
Mark E. Scott, Conley Rose, PC - Austin, TX
7:30 am
Austin Only

Registration Opens

Includes continental breakfast.
8:20 am

Welcoming Remarks
8:30 am

0.75 hr

Recent Developments in Claims Construction

Claim construction remains pivotal for patent preparation/prosecution, trials, appeals, and AIA post grant review proceedings. Focus on latest post-Teva Federal Circuit cases and the PTAB's claim construction "rules, practices and so-forth," including Dell/SAS and APA restrictions.

Kenneth R. Adamo, Kirkland & Ellis LLP - Chicago, IL

Kenneth R. Adamo, Kirkland & Ellis LLP - Chicago, IL
9:15 am

0.50 hr

Indirect Infringement and Divided Infringement

Examine the evolving impact of Commill and Akamai in the context of indirect and divided infringement.

Kevin Kudlac, Greenberg Traurig, LLP - Austin, TX

Kevin Kudlac, Greenberg Traurig, LLP - Austin, TX
9:45 am

0.50 hr

Octane Requires More Fitness

Discuss what makes a case “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 after the Supreme Court decision in Octane Fitness, including an analysis of developing trends and common pitfalls.

Gregory L. Hillyer, Brinks Gilson & Lione - Washington, DC

Gregory L. Hillyer, Brinks Gilson & Lione - Washington, DC
10:15 am

Break
10:30 am

0.50 hr

Defining the Contours of Alice

Recent decisions on Section 101 patent-eligible subject matter have begun to connect the dots, giving additional shape to the Alice analysis. Review these decisions and consider the lessons to be learned.

Steven R. Borgman, Vinson & Elkins LLP - Houston, TX
Janice Le Ta, Vinson & Elkins LLP - Austin, TX

Steven R. Borgman, Vinson & Elkins LLP - Houston, TX
Janice Le Ta, Vinson & Elkins LLP - Austin, TX
11:00 am

1.00 hr

Section 101 and Alice: Prosecution Tips and New USPTO Guidelines

Engage in a practical discussion of the USPTO guidelines and their examples to help navigate a sound path from disclosure development, through application drafting, to launch into difficult and changeable seas. Hear experiences from regular interviews in the office to the USPTO’s most recent guidance for prosecution of those applications already at sea.

Michael W. Piper, Conley Rose, PC - Plano, TX

Michael W. Piper, Conley Rose, PC - Plano, TX
12:00 pm
Austin Only

Pick Up Lunch (in Austin)

Included in registration.
Thursday Afternoon, Nov. 3, 2016
Presiding Officer:
Michael P. Adams, Jackson Walker LLP - Austin, TX
LUNCHEON PRESENTATION
Thank You to Our Exclusive Sponsor

Conley Rose, PC
12:20 pm

0.50 hr

Interview with the USPTO Texas Regional Director

Hope C. Shimabuku, Regional Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Texas Regional Office - Dallas, TX
Moderator:
David L. McCombs, Haynes and Boone, LLP - Dallas, TX

Hope C. Shimabuku, Regional Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Texas Regional Office - Dallas, TX
Moderator:
David L. McCombs, Haynes and Boone, LLP - Dallas, TX
12:50 pm

Break
1:05 pm

0.50 hr

Standard-Essential Patents (SEPs): From Germany to Luxemburg and Back—Recent Legal Developments in Europe

Learn the most recent developments in dealing with standard-essential patents under European patent and antitrust laws. Address the CJEU's landmark decision in Huawei v. ZTE (2015) and the subsequent implementation, in particular, by the German patent courts, and examine injunctions and the requirements for a successful FRAND defense.

Dr. Markus Gampp, DLA Piper UK LLP - Munich, Germany

Dr. Markus Gampp, DLA Piper UK LLP - Munich, Germany
1:35 pm

1.00 hr
0.25 hr ethics

PTAB Proceedings: New Rules and Key Practice Tips

Discuss the best practices and current trends at the PTAB, including a review of new PTAB rules, evidence issues, and practice tips.

Moderator:
Andrew S. Ehmke, Haynes and Boone, LLP - Dallas, TX
Panelists:
Michael T. Rosato, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati - Seattle, WA
Mark Thomas Garrett, Norton Rose Fulbright - Austin, TX
Gregory P. Huh, Haynes and Boone, LLP - Richardson, TX

Moderator:
Andrew S. Ehmke, Haynes and Boone, LLP - Dallas, TX
Panelists:
Michael T. Rosato, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati - Seattle, WA
Mark Thomas Garrett, Norton Rose Fulbright - Austin, TX
Gregory P. Huh, Haynes and Boone, LLP - Richardson, TX
2:35 pm

0.75 hr

Tips and Strategies for Practicing Before the PTAB

The panel of former PTAB judges share their experiences on what works most effectively in practice before the PTAB.

Moderator:
Hon. Amber L. Hagy, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Dallas, TX
Panelists:
Scott E. Kamholz, Foley Hoag LLP - Washington, DC
James D. Smith, Ecolab - Wadsworth, IL

Moderator:
Hon. Amber L. Hagy, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Dallas, TX
Panelists:
Scott E. Kamholz, Foley Hoag LLP - Washington, DC
James D. Smith, Ecolab - Wadsworth, IL
3:20 pm

Break
3:30 pm

0.75 hr

Concurrent Proceedings: Tension between PTAB and the District Courts

Explore what is really happening in the practice—including what litigators need to be concerned about within the District Courts and what patent owners should know when taking their cases before the PTAB. Learn how the different courts are approaching stays (and the implications of stays), how judges are being forced to deal with cases, the different evidentiary standards, and more.

Moderator:
Robert Greene Sterne, Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. - Washington, DC
Panelists:
David J. Healey, Fish & Richardson P.C. - Houston, TX
Brian W. Oaks, Baker Botts L.L.P. - Austin, TX

Moderator:
Robert Greene Sterne, Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. - Washington, DC
Panelists:
David J. Healey, Fish & Richardson P.C. - Houston, TX
Brian W. Oaks, Baker Botts L.L.P. - Austin, TX
4:15 pm

1.00 hr
0.50 hr ethics

Judicial Panel

Hear distinguished judges from the District Court discuss their experiences hearing and trying patent cases.

Moderator:
Alan D. Albright, Bracewell - Austin, TX
Panelists:
Hon. David Folsom, Jackson Walker LLP - Texarkana, TX
Hon. Faith S. Hochberg, Judge Hochberg ADR - New York City, NY
Hon. Roy Payne, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas - Marshall, TX

Moderator:
Alan D. Albright, Bracewell - Austin, TX
Panelists:
Hon. David Folsom, Jackson Walker LLP - Texarkana, TX
Hon. Faith S. Hochberg, Judge Hochberg ADR - New York City, NY
Hon. Roy Payne, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas - Marshall, TX
5:15 pm

Adjourn
Austin Only

Networking Reception (in Austin from 5:15 p.m. – 6:15 p.m.)

Join us for drinks and hors d'oeuvres with program faculty and attendees.

Thank You to Our Exclusive Sponsor
Vinson & Elkins LLP

Time

Credit

Subject

Speaker
Friday Morning, Nov. 4, 2016
Presiding Officer:
William D. Wiese, DuBois, Bryant & Campbell, L.L.P. - Austin, TX
7:30 am
Austin Only

Conference Room Opens

Includes continental breakfast.
8:30 am

0.75 hr

Supreme Court Update

Consider aspects of the Supreme Court’s continuing involvement in patent law, with specific reference to cases decided in October Term 2015 and pending in October Term 2016. Also, trace the themes or dynamics that extend beyond individual cases.

John M. Golden, The University of Texas School of Law - Austin, TX

John M. Golden, The University of Texas School of Law - Austin, TX
9:15 am

0.50 hr

AIA Section 102 Now Being Seen in Litigated Cases

Investigate the new conditions for novelty under the AIA, 35 U.S.C. §102, now seen in litigated cases from patent applications first filed after March 16, 2013, including how those cases play out and what patent litigators should be looking for.

Ramzi R. Khazen, McKool Smith - Austin, TX
Steven J. Pollinger, McKool Smith - Austin, TX

Ramzi R. Khazen, McKool Smith - Austin, TX
Steven J. Pollinger, McKool Smith - Austin, TX
9:45 am

0.50 hr

Means-plus-Function Claims after Williamson v. Citrix

Discuss the impact of the Federal Circuit’s decision in Williamson v. Citrix on claim construction, claim scope, and claim validity.

Aden M. Allen, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C. - Austin, TX
José C. Villarreal, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C. - Austin, TX

Aden M. Allen, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C. - Austin, TX
José C. Villarreal, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C. - Austin, TX
10:15 am

Break
10:30 am

0.50 hr

Overseas Sales in Light of Lexmark, Halo, and Life Tech

The development of a global marketplace has disrupted settled notions of how activities abroad impact enforcement of U.S. patent rights. Address recent developments in the law of patent exhaustion and foreign sales of products patented in the U.S.

Ajeet P. Pai, Baker Botts L.L.P. - Austin, TX

Ajeet P. Pai, Baker Botts L.L.P. - Austin, TX
11:00 am

0.50 hr

Opinion Practice after Halo and Stryker—More Valuable Now?

Explore the value and usefulness of opinions of counsel in the wake of the Supreme Court’s recent Halo and Stryker decisions. Highlights include retracing the recent history of opinions of counsel in patent litigation, identifying various costs and benefits of opinions of counsel, and offering suggestions for when it can be beneficial to obtain an opinions of counsel.

Jeffrey D. Mills, King & Spalding - Austin, TX

Jeffrey D. Mills, King & Spalding - Austin, TX
11:30 am

0.50 hr

Rethinking IP Strategies

Track the impact of the Defend Trade Secrets Act and the America Invents Act, on the protection of technology.

Hilda C. Galvan, Jones Day - Dallas, TX

Hilda C. Galvan, Jones Day - Dallas, TX
12:00 pm
Austin Only

Pick Up Lunch (in Austin)

Included in registration
Friday Afternoon, Nov. 4, 2016
Presiding Officer:
Richard L. Wynne Jr., Thompson & Knight LLP - Dallas, TX
LUNCHEON PRESENTATION
Thank You to Our Exclusive Sponsor

Baker Botts L.L.P.
12:20 pm

0.75 hr

The Surprising Resilience of the Patent System

Despite seemingly massive changes in patent law in the last 40 years, first towards stronger and then towards weaker protection, the basic trends in use of the patent system have remained largely unchanged. Find out why.

Mark A. Lemley, Stanford Law School and Durie Tangri LLP - Stanford and San Francisco, CA

Mark A. Lemley, Stanford Law School and Durie Tangri LLP - Stanford and San Francisco, CA
1:05 pm

Break
1:20 pm

0.75 hr

Licensing Agreements

Drafting and negotiating patent licenses has always been tricky, but the rapid pace of technological disruption, the increasingly complex web of industry relationships, and developing bodies of law have come together to make it more challenging than ever. Review how licensing strategies should evolve to take into account these and related factors, with an emphasis on real-world drafting and negotiating examples.

Edward A. Cavazos, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP - Austin, TX
Keith E. Witek, Tesla Motors - Austin, TX

Edward A. Cavazos, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP - Austin, TX
Keith E. Witek, Tesla Motors - Austin, TX
2:05 pm

1.00 hr
0.25 hr ethics

In House Counsel Panel

Panelists discuss the issues that matter most from the perspective of in-house counsel. Engage in a wide ranging discussion of patent prosecution, litigation and licensing issues, and the prospect for patent reform as viewed by those working within the biotech, retail, and petroleum industries.

Moderator:
Mark E. Patrick, Texas Instruments Incorporated - Dallas, TX
Panelists:
Marcella Watkins, Shell Oil Company - Houston, TX
Diane K. Lettelleir, J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. - Plano, TX
Ana C. Ward, Rosetta Genomics - Austin, TX

Moderator:
Mark E. Patrick, Texas Instruments Incorporated - Dallas, TX
Panelists:
Marcella Watkins, Shell Oil Company - Houston, TX
Diane K. Lettelleir, J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. - Plano, TX
Ana C. Ward, Rosetta Genomics - Austin, TX
3:05 pm

1.00 hr ethics

Privilege in Patent Cases: What’s New?

Analyze the privilege and work-product issues that arise in patent practice, including the risks still associated with relying upon protection over communications involving patent agents, and explore the risks of various commercial arrangements, such as licensing and joint ventures.

David Hricik, Mercer University School of Law and Taylor English Duma LLP - Macon and Atlanta, GA

David Hricik, Mercer University School of Law and Taylor English Duma LLP - Macon and Atlanta, GA
4:05 pm

Adjourn

Day 1 November 3, 2016
Day 2 November 4, 2016

Download Schedule

Conference Faculty

Kenneth R. Adamo

Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Chicago, IL

Alan D. Albright

Bracewell
Austin, TX

Aden M. Allen

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.
Austin, TX

Steven R. Borgman

Vinson & Elkins LLP
Houston, TX

Edward A. Cavazos

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Austin, TX

Andrew S. Ehmke

Haynes and Boone, LLP
Dallas, TX

Hon. David Folsom

Jackson Walker LLP
Texarkana, TX

Hilda C. Galvan

Jones Day
Dallas, TX

Dr. Markus Gampp

DLA Piper UK LLP
Munich, Germany

Mark Thomas Garrett

Norton Rose Fulbright
Austin, TX

John M. Golden

The University of Texas School of Law
Austin, TX

Hon. Amber L. Hagy

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Dallas, TX

David J. Healey

Fish & Richardson P.C.
Houston, TX

Gregory L. Hillyer

Brinks Gilson & Lione
Washington, DC

Hon. Faith S. Hochberg

Judge Hochberg ADR
New York City, NY

David Hricik

Mercer University School of Law and Taylor English Duma LLP
Macon and Atlanta, GA

Gregory P. Huh

Haynes and Boone, LLP
Richardson, TX

Scott E. Kamholz

Foley Hoag LLP
Washington, DC

Ramzi R. Khazen

McKool Smith
Austin, TX

Kevin Kudlac

Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Austin, TX

Mark A. Lemley

Stanford Law School and Durie Tangri LLP
Stanford and San Francisco, CA

Diane K. Lettelleir

J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc.
Plano, TX

David L. McCombs

Haynes and Boone, LLP
Dallas, TX

Jeffrey D. Mills

King & Spalding
Austin, TX

Brian W. Oaks

Baker Botts L.L.P.
Austin, TX

Ajeet P. Pai

Baker Botts L.L.P.
Austin, TX

Mark E. Patrick

Texas Instruments Incorporated
Dallas, TX

Hon. Roy Payne

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

Michael W. Piper

Conley Rose, PC
Plano, TX

Steven J. Pollinger

McKool Smith
Austin, TX

Michael T. Rosato

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
Seattle, WA

Hope C. Shimabuku

Regional Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Texas Regional Office
Dallas, TX

James D. Smith

Ecolab
Wadsworth, IL

Robert Greene Sterne

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
Washington, DC

Janice Le Ta

Vinson & Elkins LLP
Austin, TX

José C. Villarreal

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.
Austin, TX

Ana C. Ward

Rosetta Genomics
Austin, TX

Marcella Watkins

Shell Oil Company
Houston, TX

Keith E. Witek

Tesla Motors
Austin, TX

Planning Committee

Alan D. Albright—Co-Chair

Bracewell
Austin, TX

Mark E. Scott—Co-Chair

Conley Rose, PC
Austin, TX

Michael P. Adams

Jackson Walker LLP
Austin, TX

Tom Adolph

Adolph Locklar
Houston, TX

Michael C. Barrett

Cirrus Logic
Austin, TX

Brent K. Bersin

Duff and Phelps, LLC
Houston, TX

Steven R. Borgman

Vinson & Elkins LLP
Houston, TX

Christa Brown-Sanford

Baker Botts L.L.P.
Dallas, TX

John D. Flynn

IBM Corporation
Austin, TX

Hilda C. Galvan

Jones Day
Dallas, TX

Mark Thomas Garrett

Norton Rose Fulbright
Austin, TX

John M. Golden

The University of Texas School of Law
Austin, TX

John M. Guaragna

DLA Piper LLP US
Austin, TX

David J. Healey

Fish & Richardson P.C.
Houston, TX

Joanna Jefferson

The University of Texas School of Law
Austin, TX

Robert L. King

Silicon Labs
Austin, TX

Kevin Kudlac

Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Austin, TX

William L. LaFuze

McKool Smith
Houston, TX

Mark A. Lemley

Stanford Law School and Durie Tangri LLP
Stanford and San Francisco, CA

David L. McCombs

Haynes and Boone, LLP
Dallas, TX

Kevin J. Meek

Baker Botts L.L.P.
Austin, TX

Eric L. Natinsky

Quick Technologies Inc.
Austin, TX

James J. Nawrocki

IPFC Corp.
Houston, TX

David W. O'Brien

Haynes and Boone, LLP
Austin, TX

Steven J. Pollinger

McKool Smith
Austin, TX

Garland T. Stephens

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Houston, TX

José C. Villarreal

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.
Austin, TX

Shirley Webster

Ocean Tomo, LLC
Houston, TX

William D. Wiese

DuBois, Bryant & Campbell, L.L.P.
Austin, TX

Richard L. Wynne Jr.

Thompson & Knight LLP
Dallas, TX

MCLE Credit

Texas – 14.50 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.

California – 14.50 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.

Illinois – 14.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

Within 10 days of the conference you must claim and certify your credit online in Your Briefcase, then you will be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. UT Law CLE will verify the number of Illinois attorneys in attendance within 10 days after the conference and will report your credit to the MCLE Board of the Supreme Court of Illinois. Failure to submit your credit within 10 days may result in attendance not being reported or may result in additional fees being assessed to you for credit reporting. UT Law CLE will maintain Attendance Records for four years.

New Jersey – 15.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

As The University of Texas School of Law is a State Bar of Texas approved MCLE provider (Sponsor #13), our courses are presumptively approved for MCLE credit based on a 50-minute credit hour, and in accordance with the Regulations of the Supreme Court of New Jersey Board on Continuing Legal Education. More information and details can be found in the Board of Continuing Legal Education Regulations (PDF).

At the conclusion of the conference you will need to claim and certify your credit online, in your UTCLE "Briefcase", you will then be provided a certificate of attendance . Self-report your CLE credit directly to the Supreme Court of New Jersey Board on Continuing Legal Education. UT Law CLE will maintain Attendance Records for four years.

New York – 17.00 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

As The University of Texas School of Law is a Oklahoma Bar Association presumptively approved MCLE provider (#169), and Oklahoma is a New York Approved Jurisdiction on List A, our courses are approved for MCLE credit based on a 50-minute credit hour, and in accordance with the Program Rules and the Regulations and Guidelines of the New York State Continuing Legal Education Board. More information and details can be found at Section 6 of the Regulations and Guidelines (PDF).

You must claim and certify your credit online in your UTCLE "Briefcase", and will then be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. Self-report your CLE credit directly to the New York State Bar Association. UT Law CLE will maintain Attendance Records for four years.

Ohio – 14.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

You must claim and certify your credit online in Your Briefcase, you will then be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. UT Law CLE will report credit on your behalf to The Supreme Court of Ohio within 30 days after the conference.

Oklahoma – 17.50 hrs | 2.50 hrs Ethics

You must claim and certify your credit online in Your Briefcase, then you will then be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. UT Law CLE will report credit on your behalf to the Oklahoma Bar Association within 30 days after the conference.

Pennsylvania – Expected – 13.00 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

UT Law CLE is an approved provider of Pennsylvania credit, sponsor #236. You must claim your credit online in Your Briefcase, and will then be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. Attorney attendance will be reported to Pennsylvania within 2 weeks after credit is claimed . Attorneys are not able to report this credit on their own, and UT Law CLE pays all associated fees for the credit hours. Contact us at accreditation@utcle.org if you have additional questions.

Other Credit

TX Accounting CPE – 17.50 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.

MCLE Credit

Texas – 14.50 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 Completion will be emailed to you upon claiming credit. 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.

California – 14.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

To claim California MCLE credit, California credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. This accreditation requires attendance verification. UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. Verification pop-ups will NOT display when the webcast video player is in "full screen" mode. Furthermore, the notification sound effect alerting pop-ups, will NOT play on mobile devices. We recommend viewing from a computer, as opposed to a mobile device, should MCLE credit, other than Texas, be needed. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.
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.

MCLE credit is presented based on a 60-minute credit hour.

Illinois – 14.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

To claim Illinois MCLE credit, Illinois credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. This accreditation requires attendance verification. UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. Verification pop-ups will NOT display when the webcast video player is in "full screen" mode. Furthermore, the notification sound effect alerting pop-ups, will NOT play on mobile devices. We recommend viewing from a computer, as opposed to a mobile device, should MCLE credit, other than Texas, be needed. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

Within 10 days of the conference you must claim and certify your credit online in Your Briefcase, then you will be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. UT Law CLE will verify the number of Illinois attorneys in attendance within 10 days after the conference and will report your credit to the MCLE Board of the Supreme Court of Illinois. Failure to submit your credit within 10 days may result in attendance not being reported or may result in additional fees being assessed to you for credit reporting. UT Law CLE will maintain Attendance Records for four years.

MCLE credit is presented based on a 60-minute credit hour.

New Jersey – 15.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

To claim New Jersey MCLE credit, New Jersey credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. This accreditation requires attendance verification. UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. Verification pop-ups will NOT display when the webcast video player is in "full screen" mode. Furthermore, the notification sound effect alerting pop-ups, will NOT play on mobile devices. We recommend viewing from a computer, as opposed to a mobile device, should MCLE credit, other than Texas, be needed. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

Upon claiming credit, a Certificate of Completion will be emailed to you. At the conclusion of the conference you will need to claim and certify your credit online, in your UTCLE "Briefcase". Self-report your CLE credit directly to the Supreme Court of New Jersey Board on Continuing Legal Education. UT Law CLE will maintain Attendance Records for four years. Self-report your credit directly to the Supreme Court of New Jersey Board on CLE .

As The University of Texas School of Law is a State Bar of Texas approved MCLE provider (Sponsor #13), our courses are presumptively approved for MCLE credit based on a 50-minute credit hour, and in accordance with the Regulations of the Supreme Court of New Jersey Board on Continuing Legal Education. More information and details can be found in the Board of Continuing Legal Education Regulations (PDF).

New Jersey MCLE credit is based on a 50-minute credit hour. This accreditation requires attendance verification. In compliance with the rules, UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

New York – 17.00 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

To claim New York MCLE credit, New York credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. This accreditation requires attendance verification. UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. Verification pop-ups will NOT display when the webcast video player is in "full screen" mode. Furthermore, the notification sound effect alerting pop-ups, will NOT play on mobile devices. We recommend viewing from a computer, as opposed to a mobile device, should MCLE credit, other than Texas, be needed. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

As The University of Texas School of Law is a Oklahoma Bar Association presumptively approved MCLE provider (#169), and Oklahoma is a New York Approved Jurisdiction on List A, our courses are approved for MCLE credit based on a 50-minute credit hour, and in accordance with the Program Rules and the Regulations and Guidelines of the New York State Continuing Legal Education Board. More information and details can be found a Section 6 of the Regulations and Guidelines (PDF).

Upon claiming and certifying your credit, a Certificate of Completion will be emailed to you. Self-report your credit directly to the New York State CLE Board.

New York MCLE credit is based on a 50-minute credit hour. This accreditation requires attendance verification. In compliance with the rules, UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

Ohio – 14.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

To claim Ohio MCLE credit, Ohio credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. This accreditation requires attendance verification. UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. Verification pop-ups will NOT display when the webcast video player is in "full screen" mode. Furthermore, the notification sound effect alerting pop-ups, will NOT play on mobile devices. We recommend viewing from a computer, as opposed to a mobile device, should MCLE credit, other than Texas, be needed. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

You must claim and certify your credit online in Your Briefcase, you will then be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records. UT Law CLE will report credit on your behalf to The Supreme Court of Ohio within 30 days after the conference.

MCLE credit is presented based on a 60-minute credit hour.

Oklahoma – 17.50 hrs | 2.50 hrs Ethics

To claim Oklahoma MCLE credit, Oklahoma credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. This accreditation requires attendance verification. UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. Verification pop-ups will NOT display when the webcast video player is in "full screen" mode. Furthermore, the notification sound effect alerting pop-ups, will NOT play on mobile devices. We recommend viewing from a computer, as opposed to a mobile device, should MCLE credit, other than Texas, be needed. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

The University of Texas School of Law (Provider #169) live webcast presentations meet the requirements and are presumptively approved by the Oklahoma Bar Association for MCLE credit based on a 50-minute credit hour. Upon claiming credit, a Certificate of Completion will be emailed to you. UT Law CLE will report credit on your behalf to the Oklahoma Bar Association within 30 days after the webcast.

Other States – 14.50 hrs | 2.00 hrs Ethics

Note on Self-Reporting Your Credits in Another State

If you wish to satisfy MCLE or other professional education requirements in another state for a program offered by the University of Texas School of Law, please check with the state bar or other licensing authority in that state to ensure it will qualify for self-reporting your credits.

To claim Other States MCLE credit, Other States credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. You must claim and certify your credit online in Your Briefcase, you will then be provided a Certificate of Attendance for your records and to provide to other licensing authorities as needed.

This accreditation requires attendance verification. UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

MCLE credit is presented based on a 60-minute credit hour.

Other Credit

TX Accounting CPE – 17.50 hrs

The University of Texas School of Law (Provider #250) live webcast presentations meet the requirements and 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.

This accreditation requires attendance verification. In compliance with the rules, UT Law CLE monitors and records attendee responses to questions that randomly appear during the live webcast presentation. The response record is detailed on the Certificate of Completion.

To claim Texas Accounting CPE credit, the Texas Accounting CPE credit option must be selected PRIOR to viewing the live webcast. Upon claiming credit, a Certificate of Completion will be emailed to you. Self-report your CPE credit directly to the Texas State Board of Public Accountancy.

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

Key Dates

Austin – Nov 3-4, 2016 – Four Seasons Hotel

Conference Concluded

Live Webcast – Nov 3-4, 2016

Conference Concluded

Buy

Austin
Live Webcast

Individual
Last day for $695.00 Regular pricing: Oct 26, 2016
$745.00 for registrations received after this time

Group (5 registrants minimum)
Last day for $625.00 Regular pricing: Oct 26, 2016
$675.00 for registrations received after this time

Group (10 registrants minimum)
Last day for $560.00 Regular pricing: Oct 26, 2016
$610.00 for registrations received after this time

Cancellation Policy
Last day for full refund cancellation: Oct 28, 2016
$50 processing fee applied after this date
Last day for cancellation: Oct 31, 2016

Individual
$645.00

Group (5 registrants minimum)
$580.00

Group (10 registrants minimum)
$520.00

Cancellation Policy
Last day for full refund cancellation: Oct 28, 2016
$50 processing fee applied after this date
Last day for cancellation: Oct 31, 2016

Venue

Four Seasons Hotel

98 San Jacinto Boulevard
Austin, TX 78701-4082
512-478-4500 (reservations)
Map

Accommodations

$269 room rate good through October 3, 2016 (subject to availability).

Parking Information

$12 Event Daily; $16 Valet Daily; $32.50 Overnight Self-Parking or Valet.

Our Sponsors

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

IPFC Corp

IPFC Corp
ipfccorp.com

IPFC is a financial consulting firm that provides corporate, individual and law firm clients with financial, economic, valuation, damages assessments and expert witness services for various business purposes, including commercial disputes. IPFC professionals have significant experience in Intellectual Property matters. Intellectual property often makes up a significant part of a company's or individual's asset portfolio. Assessing the proper values of these assets is challenging and may be necessary for licensing, sales, acquisitions, or disputes involving claims of infringement or other wrongful actions. Our analyses have included market and pricing assessments, product line profitability assessments, lost profits and reasonable royalty determinations and licensing compliance. Whether we are researching industry information, analyzing complex electronic databases, developing intricate financial models, or presenting our analyses to corporate management or in court proceedings, we offer a focused, hands-on approach that results in an effective and efficient process.
Baker Botts L.L.P.

Baker Botts L.L.P.
bakerbotts.com

Baker Botts is a globally respected law firm whose reach and depth of understanding help deliver better, more innovative solutions to our clients. Our intellectual property lawyers offer a full-service IP practice, including strategic IP counseling; patent and trademark acquisition; patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret litigation; and copyright management and licensing in industries encompassing telecom, software, semiconductor, life sciences, energy, financial services, retail and more. The vast majority of our IP lawyers hold at least one engineering or science degree, and our IP practice consistently ranks in the top five in surveys by various prestigious publications. Most recently, Baker Botts’ Intellectual Property Practice was named the 2015 Texas Lawyer IP Litigation Department of the Year.
Conley Rose, P.C.

Conley Rose, P.C.
conleyrose.com

Conley Rose is a Texas-based intellectual property boutique offering a complete range of services for technology-driven companies and entrepreneurs. Our clients’ needs for sophisticated intellectual property services have enabled us to grow to a firm of over forty IP-focused professionals servicing clients worldwide from our offices in Houston, Dallas, and Austin. For the last 25 years, Conley Rose has prepared, procured and maintained patents, trademarks, and copyrights, and has continued to both enforce clients’ intellectual property rights against infringers and defend its clients against claims of infringement. Conley Rose also has a robust transactional practice, including the drafting and negotiation of intellectual property transfer, license, and development agreements, as well as preparing and providing portfolio analysis, legal opinions, due diligence review and counseling.
Vinson & Elkins LLP

Vinson & Elkins LLP
velaw.com

In its nearly 100-year history, the firm has grown to more than 650 lawyers located in energy hubs, financial centers and political capitals around the world. V&E lawyers provide legal services to some of the world's largest and most sophisticated business enterprises addressing a multitude of challenging litigation, transactional and regulatory matters, with a growing emphasis on intellectual property, technology and life sciences. Today, V&E serves clients from 16 global offices. Our network of offices allows us to leverage experience from many markets, cultures and perspectives and to bring our clients the most comprehensive solutions to all legal challenges.
Fish & Richardson P.C.

Fish & Richardson P.C.
fr.com

Fish & Richardson is a global patent, intellectual property (IP) litigation, and commercial litigation law firm with more than 400 attorneys and technology specialists across the U.S. and Europe. Fish has been named the #1 patent litigation firm in the U.S. for 13 consecutive years and is one of the busiest post-grant firms, representing more petitioners at the PTAB than any other firm. Fish has been winning cases worth billions in controversy—often by making new law—for the most innovative clients and influential industry leaders since 1878. For more information, visit www.fr.com.
Bracewell LLP

Bracewell LLP
bgllp.com

Bracewell is a leading law and government relations firm serving the oil and gas, power, financial services, technology and public finance industries throughout the world. Our industry focus enables us to maintain cutting-edge experience and in-depth knowledge of the commercial, legal and regulatory challenges faced by our clients so that we can provide the most effective legal solutions to facilitate transactions and resolve disputes. Bracewell offers the personalized attention of a boutique and the broad-based resources of our full-service law firm. We advise on all aspects of intellectual property law, including patent prosecution and enforcement, licensing, technology transfers, and joint venture agreements. Our seasoned litigators practice in courtrooms across the country and include both licensed patent attorneys and litigators experienced in complex commercial litigation. This sophisticated litigation experience includes in-depth training in science, energy and technology, and allows Bracewell's intellectual property litigation practice to deliver an aggressive and practical defense of our clients’ valuable intellectual property rights.
Charles River Associates

Charles River Associates
crai.com

Charles River Associates is a leading global consulting firm that offers economic, financial, and strategy expertise to major law firms, corporations, accounting firms, and governments around the world. With proven skills in complex cases and exceptional strength in analytics, CRA consultants have provided astute guidance to clients in thousands of successful engagements. We offer litigation and regulatory support, business strategy and planning, market and demand forecasting, policy analysis, and risk management consulting. Our success stems from the outstanding capabilities of our consultants, many of whom are recognized as experts in their respective fields; our close relationships with a select group of respected academic and industry experts; and from a corporate philosophy that stresses interdisciplinary collaboration and responsive service. Headquartered in Boston, the firm has offices internationally.
DuBois Bryant & Campbell

DuBois Bryant & Campbell
dbcllp.com

DuBois, Bryant & Campbell is an Austin, Texas based law firm dedicated to providing top quality legal services at highly competitive rates. For over a decade, clients across Texas have relied on DuBois Bryant & Campbell’s in-depth expertise and experience across a diverse range of practice areas, from individual estate planning to complex commercial transactions.
Duff & Phelps, LLC

Duff & Phelps, LLC
duffandphelps.com

Duff & Phelps is the premier global valuation and corporate finance advisor with expertise in complex valuation, dispute and legal management consulting, M&A, restructuring, and compliance and regulatory consulting. The firm’s more than 2,000 employees serve a diverse range of clients from offices around the world. Duff & Phelps’ Intellectual Property Disputes practice provides independent expert analyses and consulting services to clients involved in complex IP disputes. Our team of economic, financial and accounting experts have significant experience in calculating and analyzing damages relating to: infringement of patents, trademarks, trade names, and copyrights; misappropriation of trade secrets; and license and valuation disputes. Our team adds value through all through all phases of litigation including preliminary case assessment, expert reports, deposition and trial testimony, and post-verdict damages and impact analysis.
Haynes and Boone, LLP

Haynes and Boone, LLP
haynesboone.com

Haynes and Boone, LLP is an international corporate law firm with offices in Texas, New York, California, Chicago, Denver, Washington, D.C., Mexico City and Shanghai, providing a full spectrum of legal services in technology, financial services, energy and private equity. With more than 575 lawyers, Haynes and Boone is ranked among the largest law firms in the nation by The National Law Journal.
Jackson Walker

Jackson Walker
www.jw.com/

Jackson Walker LLP is one of the oldest and largest Texas-based law firms. The firm has more than 360 attorneys in seven Texas offices and represents Fortune 500 companies, multinational corporations, major financial institutions, and a wide range of public and private companies. Jackson Walker’s Intellectual Property practice consists of an experienced group of attorneys who help clients obtain, protect, and enforce IP rights, as well as maximize IP through various business transactions. The firm also maintains a powerful and experienced team of IP Litigation attorneys who combine proven successful trial strategies with skillful and cost-effective advocacy. We have enforced and defended all types of IP matters in federal and state courts across the United States. Among other jurisdictions, we have significant patent litigation experience in the Eastern District of Texas, one of the country's premier forums for patent disputes, and we include a former judge from this forum as part of our team.
Jones Day

Jones Day
jonesday.com

Jones Day, a legal institution with more than 2,500 lawyers on five continents, is based on a set of core principles - the most critical of which is a relentless focus on client service that transcends individual interests. Jones Day ranks among the world’s largest and most geographically diverse law firms, with a fully networked and balanced presence in the world’s major economic and financial centers. As a full-service firm, Jones Day provides clients seamless global access to a wide range of legal services. Our focus on providing award-winning client service means we bring the best of the Firm to every engagement—no matter where our clients are doing business. We are One Firm Worldwide.
McKool Smith

McKool Smith
mckoolsmith.com

In intellectual property cases, McKool Smith’s courtroom track record is unrivaled. Since 2006, the firm has secured eight nine-figure patent infringement verdicts—more than any other law firm in the country—and seven eight-figure patent-infringement verdicts. As noted in Lex Machina's latest Patent Litigation Damages Report, since 2000, McKool Smith has won more patent litigation damages than any other law firm ($2.04 Billion). In January, the firm was awarded “IP Firm of the Year” by Benchmark Litigation. The firm has also been awarded “IP Group of the Year” by Law360. These are just some of the accolades that have helped McKool Smith become what The Wall Street Journal describes as "...one of the biggest law firm success stories of the past decade."
Norton Rose Fulbright

Norton Rose Fulbright
nortonrosefulbright.com

Our global intellectual property team advises on the acquisition, exploitation, use and enforcement of intellectual property rights across the globe. We provide cost effective advice to clients on an international basis, advising on both domestic and cross-border transactions and disputes. We have particular experience across our key industry sectors— technology and innovation; life sciences and healthcare; financial institutions; energy; infrastructure, mining and commodities; and transport. Many of our professionals have scientific degrees, including masters and Ph.D.s, to complement their practical experience and combine deep industry and technical knowledge with broad legal understanding. Norton Rose Fulbright is a global legal practice. We provide the world's pre-eminent corporations and financial institutions with a full business law service. We have more than 3,800 lawyers based in over 50 cities across Europe, the United States, Canada, Latin America, Asia, Australia, Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com

Pillsbury is a full-service law firm with an industry focus on energy & natural resources, financial services including financial institutions, real estate & construction, and technology. Based in the world's major financial, technology and energy centers, Pillsbury counsels clients on global business, regulatory and litigation matters.

Pillsbury’s Intellectual Property practice advises clients on developing successful and comprehensive IP strategies by protecting, managing, asserting, defending and leveraging their IP assets. We field a team of more than 100 IP attorneys, plus technical consultants and patent agents from offices in key global financial and technology centers. Our IP team includes scientists and engineers with advanced degrees in areas including electrical and mechanical engineering, chemistry, biotechnology, physics and a number of other technical disciplines. Several team members are former U.S. Patent and Trademark Office examiners.
Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox

Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox
skgf.com

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox attorneys, registered patent agents, students and technical specialists include some of the country's most respected practitioners of intellectual property law. Most of the firm's professionals hold an advanced level degree, including 50+ with doctorates in science and engineering. Sterne Kessler's client base includes emerging and established companies, venture capital firms, individual entrepreneurs and universities—from bleeding edge technology fields like carbon footprint technologies, pharmacogenomics, and biofuels to next generation electronics and other consumer products.

Sterne Kessler is keenly focused on meeting and exceeding clients' expectations with integrated technical leadership across all areas of practice and strongly believes that strategic counsel, patent prosecution, patent office litigation and other inter partes litigation go together. That integration starts from deep technical expertise that is integral to the firm's work in patent prosecution and it aids the firm's work before the PTAB and the courts, including USITC, U.S. District Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Thompson & Knight LLP

Thompson & Knight LLP
tklaw.com

Established in 1887, Thompson & Knight is a full-service law firm with more than 300 attorneys. The Firm provides legal solutions to clients and communities around the world and is particularly recognized for its depth of experience and capabilities on behalf of the energy industry. Thompson & Knight has been named “Law Firm of the Year” in Oil & Gas Law in U.S. News-Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” for 2011-2013 and 2015.
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
wgsr.com

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is the premier provider of legal services to technology, life sciences, and growth enterprises worldwide, as well as the public and private capital markets that finance them. The firm’s broad array of services and practice areas is focused on addressing the principal challenges faced by the management, boards of directors, shareholders, and in-house counsel of our clients. We represent companies at every stage of development, from entrepreneurial start-ups to multibillion-dollar global corporations. Our distinguished international roster of clients are leaders in a wide variety of industries, including information technology, life sciences, energy and clean technology, communications, retail, and financial services.
Winstead PC

Winstead PC
winstead.com

Winstead has a large national and global footprint in intellectual property, with highly competitive rates and the deep technical diversity to advise corporations, inventors and authors, start-ups, and research institutions and universities. Our IP lawyers and supporting team function as a nimble IP boutique practice, working equally well with—and at the pace of—entrepreneurs, corporate counsel and executives. With our large firm infrastructure, however, we can scale fast, and are able to quickly jump into huge litigation and large, tight-deadline prosecutions. Winstead IP lawyers perfect, protect and commercialize our clients’ inventions, works of authorship, trademarks, trade secrets and know-how throughout the world.

Advanced Patent Law Institute

Overview

Event Schedule

Thursday Morning, Nov. 3, 2016

Thursday Afternoon, Nov. 3, 2016

Friday Morning, Nov. 4, 2016

Friday Afternoon, Nov. 4, 2016

Conference Faculty

Planning Committee

Credit Info

MCLE Credit

Other Credit

MCLE Credit

Other Credit

Key Dates

Venue

Four Seasons Hotel

Accommodations

Parking Information

Our Sponsors

IPFC Corp

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Conley Rose, P.C.

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Fish & Richardson P.C.

Bracewell LLP

Charles River Associates

DuBois Bryant & Campbell

Duff & Phelps, LLC

Haynes and Boone, LLP

Jackson Walker

Jones Day

McKool Smith

Norton Rose Fulbright

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox

Thompson & Knight LLP

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Winstead PC

Stay in the loop with UT Law CLE