Reid Huefner has been practicing as an intellectual property and technology attorney for more than 17 years. Reid started his career at one of the largest, most successful general practice and intellectual property firms in the world, where he practiced for roughly 10 years and was elevated to and held the position of partner for four years. In 2016, Reid left “Big Law’ to join three of his former Big Law partners to build and grow a top-notch boutique intellectual property law firm.
Reid’s practice includes litigation, transactional, and opinion work concerning all aspects of intellectual property law. In addition to providing litigation services to clients in a host of venues, including federal and state district and appellate court, the ITC, the USPTO and PTAB, and U.S. Customs, Reid has also provided intellectual property support in a variety of transactional contexts, such as software licensing, research and development and joint venture agreements, outsourcing, mergers, acquisitions, and bankruptcy. Reid has both depth and breadth of experience counselling clients on defending and protecting their patent, trade secret, copyright, and trademark interests in both litigation and transaction contexts.
Best Lawyers (2023-present)
Pro Bono Volunteer Attorney of the Year Award, Lawyers’ Committee for Better Housing (2009)
Founding Member and Financial and Legal Officer of Cougar Capital, a University-sponsored venture capital/private equity fund
Second Place, 2006 Venture Capital Investment Competition, Irvine, CA
Semi-Finalist, 2006 Giles Rich IP Moot Court Regional Competition, San Francisco, CA
Best Brief and Winning Team, 2006 Giles Rich IP Moot Court, Utah State Competition
Reid’s practice includes patent, trade secret, copyright, and trademark work for industry-leading clients in the following technological areas:
Reid has also first chaired many pro bono cases, which have focused primarily on residential real estate disputes, artists involved in intellectual property disputes, and violations of the Illinois Freedom of Information Act.
As a litigator, Reid has handled many high-stakes patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret, restrictive covenant, unfair competition, false advertising, and antitrust matters. Some of those matters include:
Furthermore, Reid has been counsel in over a dozen Patent Office review proceedings, including successfully petitioning the PTAB to institute an IPR on a patent touted as the foundation for a product line generating over a billion dollars per year and that had previously withstood numerous other validity challenges before the Patent Office and several federal court litigations.
Finally, Reid also works with clients to strengthen their intellectual property portfolios, including through improving protection of key products and technologies, broadening existing intellectual property portfolios, and licensing or purchasing third party intellectual property. Reid has handled myriad transactional and counselling projects, including supporting the purchase and sale of companies, negotiating terms for strategic alliance and supplier/developer relationships, and counselling companies regarding freedom to operate. Some of those matters include:
AGS, Aker BioMarine, Auriga, Baxter Healthcare, Baxter International, BP, Cisco, Colgate-Palmolive, Dow Chemical, Energy Future Holdings, General Motors, Indorama, Intel, Kapsch, Keystone Automotive, LKQ Corp., Loren Cook, Massarelli’s, Mark IV, Motorola, Nest Labs (now Google), Netgear, Nutraceutical, OtterBox, The Owings Gallery, Pfizer, Ranir, Realviews Photography (Cesar Russ), Restorsea, Sandoz, Sun Microsystems (now Oracle), Swagway, U.S. Auto Parts (now Carparts.com), WARN Industries, Wowza, Zoetis, various Venture Capital and Private Equity funds and their portfolio companies
Past-President, J. Reuben Clark Law Society, Chicago Chapter
Past-chair, U.S. Patents Committee, Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago
Central District of California
Northern District of California
District of Delaware
Southern District of Georgia
Northern District of Illinois
Western District of Michigan
District of New Jersey
Southern District of New York
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Eastern District of Texas
Western District of Wisconsin
International Trade Commission
U.S. Court of International Trade
Eleventh Circuit
Partner, Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, IL (2013-2016)
Associate, Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, IL (2006-2013)
Public Interest Law Initiative Fellow, Citizen Advocacy Center, Elmhurst, IL (2007)
Law Clerk, Workman Nydegger, Salt Lake City, UT (2005-2006)
Intern, Chambers of the Honorable Judge Randall Rader, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (2005)
Intern, Chambers of the Honorable Judge Marian Blank Horn, United Stated Court of Federal Claims (2004)
Chemical Engineer, Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL (2000-2003)
Spanish
Brigham Young University, J. Reuben Clark Law School, J.D., 2006
Law Review, Editor
Brigham Young University, Marriott School of Management, M.B.A. Finance, 2006
University of Utah, B.S. Chem. Eng., B.S. Chemistry, 2000 (cum laude)
Illinois
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
CBA, Patent Law Update: Legislation and Cases from the Past Year (October 2021)
Kirkland & Ellis, Kirkland Institute of Trial Advocacy, Instructor (2015)
Design Patent Schedule A? More Like Schedule Nay. , Floatsup, LLC v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations identified in Schedule A, No. 24-cv-06736 (N.D. Ill. November 14, 2024)
District Court in the Claim Construction Zone: Federal Circuit Permits at Rule 12 Stage, UTTO Inc. v. Metrotech Corp., No. 2023-145 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 18, 2024)
On-Sale Bar Arguments Fizzle Out at the Federal Circuit , Celanese Int’l Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 2022-1827, 2024 WL 3747277, at *1 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, 2024)
After 40 Years, a Fundamental Change to Design Patent Law , LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Tech. Operations LLC, No. 21-2348 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2024)
L’Oreal Gets Trade Secrets Case Out of its Hair When Judge Chops Case for Litigation Misconduct , Metricolor LLC v. L’Oreal USA, Inc., 18-cv-00364 (C.D. Cal. March 29, 2024)
What Is “Sufficient Human Authorship” In AI-Based Works? , Second Request for Reconsideration for Refusal to Register Copyright (SR # 1-11016599571)
What the Shell? LLCs Improperly Used in Attempt to Hide Patent Monetization Firms and Shield Them from Liability , Nimitz Techs. LLC v. CNET Media, Inc., No. CV 21-1247, 2023 WL 8187441 (D. Del. Nov. 27, 2023)
“[It’s All Good, Man],” Says S.D.N.Y. to AMC , Jth Tax LLC d/b/a Liberty Tax v. AMC Networks Inc., 22-cv-06526 (S.D.N.Y. 2023)
Supreme Court Drives Train Through Jurisdiction Loophole , Mallory v. Norfolk S. Ry. Co., 143 S. Ct. 2028 (2023)
Supreme Court Tightens the Leash on Parody, Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, No. 22-148 (S. Ct., June 8, 2023)
Federal Circuit Takes a Bite Out of Apple’s Trademark Application, Bertini v. Apple Inc., 63 F.4th 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2023)
No Handling Necessary: Industry Demo Was A Public Use, Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., 2023 WL 1999900 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 15, 2023)
CAFC Refuses to Crack Open Summary Judgment of Invalidity for Non-Joinder in Bottle Patent Appeal, Plastipak Packaging, Inc., v. Premium Waters, Inc. (Federal Circuit 2022)
A License for One’s Likeness Does Not Include Tattoos, Illinois Federal Court Finds, Alexander v. Take-Two Interactive, No. 3:18-cv-00966 (S.D. Il. Sep. 30, 2022)
Preliminary Injunction Entered Preventing Transfer of Allegedly Infringing Software With Sale of Company, Bungie, Inc. v. Aimjunkies.com, No. C21-811 TSZ, 2022 WL 2391705 (W.D. Wash. July 1, 2022)
Generic Industry Skepticism Alone Cannot Preclude Motivation to Combine, Auris Health, Inc. v. Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., No. 21-1732 (Fed. Cir. 2022)
Chord Progression Katy Perry Found to Have Copied Deemed Uncopyrightable, Gray v. Hudson, 2022 WL 711246 (9th Cir. Mar. 10, 2022)
CAFC Allows More “Standing” Room In Article III Cases, Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 2020-1664, 2021 WL 6122360 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2021) & Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 2020-1828, 2021 WL 6122434 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2021)
Alice Still Decimating “Groundbreaking” Developments, Cardionet, LLC v. Infobionic, Inc., 2020-2123, 2020-2150 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 29, 2021) & USADATA Inc., v. DataWidget LLC, cv-21-00526 (D. Ariz. November 2, 2021)
Federal Circuit Limits the Scope of IPR Statutory Estoppel, In re: DMF, Inc., a California Corporation., No. 2021-153 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 9, 2021)
Intrinsic, not Extrinsic, Evidence Rule in Claim Construction, Seabed Geosolutions (US) Inc., No. 2020-1237 (Fed. Cir. August 11, 2021)
PTO Director May Review Final Decisions From IPRs, United States v. Arthrex, Inc., No. 19-1434, 2021 WL 2519433 (U.S. June 21, 2021)
When Neither Case Law Nor Logic Provides A Clear Rule, Delta T, LLC v. Dan’s Fan City, Inc., et al., 8-19-CV-1731 (M.D. Fla. 2021)
Duty to Assign? For Pre-Termination Ideas, No., Bio-Rad Labs, Inc. v. International Trade Commission et al., No. 2020-1785 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 29, 2021)
Controlling Damages, Genuine Enabling Tech. LLC v. Sony Corp., et al., 1-17-CV-00135-203 (D. Del. Apr. 12, 2021)
CAFC Can Use Mandamus Jurisdiction to Review PTAB’s Decision to Deny Institution—But Don’t Get Hopes Up, Mylan Lab’ys Ltd. v. Janssen Pharmaceutica, N.V., 2021 WL 936345 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 12, 2021)
Unanswered Demand Letters and Intervening Rights, John Bean Technologies Corp. v. Morris & Assoc., Inc., 2021 WL 641987 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 19, 2021)
That’s the Way the Trade Dress Crumbles: Third Circuit Holds No Trade Dress Protection for Pocky Sticks, Ezaki Glico Kabushiki Kaisha v. Lotte Int’l Am. Corp., No. 19-3010, 2020 WL 5951113 (3d Cir. Oct. 8, 2020)
Legitimate Product Review or Paid Product Promotion? Ninth Circuit Says Commercial Speech Plausibly Alleged, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, IPR2018-01679, Paper No. 55 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019), IPR2018-01680, Paper No. 65 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019), and IPR2018-01682, Paper No. 62 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019).
Product Development Standing and Lessons on Teaching Away, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, IPR2018-01679, Paper No. 55 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019), IPR2018-01680, Paper No. 65 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019), and IPR2018-01682, Paper No. 62 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019).
Alice/Mayo and the Printed Matter Doctrine, C.R. Bard Inc. v. AngioDynamics, Inc., 979 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2020)
The NDA Controls: Inventorship and Ownership Are Two Very Different Things, SiOnyx LLC v. Hamamatsu Photonics, Nos. 19-2359, 20-1217 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 7, 2020)
Not the Same Field? Not a Problem. Relevance to a Problem is Enough for Prior Art to be Analogous., Donner Technology, LLC v. Pro Stage Gear, LLC, App. No. 20-1104 (Fed. Cir. 2020)
Seeking to Re-Add Inventor After Request to Remove Justified, Egenera, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 2020 WL 5084288, (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2020)
Filing Down the Bars Against the Doctrine of Equivalents, Bio-Rad Labs., Inc., et al. v. 10X Genomics, Inc., Case Nos. 2019-2255, 2019-2285 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 3, 2020)
An Invalidity Challenge is not a Changed Condition: Federal Circuit Affirms Exclusion Order Rescission Petition Denial, Mayborn Grp., Ltd. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 2019-2077, 2020 WL 4006615 (Fed. Cir. July 16, 2020)
BOOKING.COM – Generic. no. Trademark. yeah., U.S.P.T.O. v. Booking.com B.V., 591 U.S. ____ (2020)
Got Fees? You’ve got some explaining to do., Amneal Pharm., LLC v. Almirall, LLC, No. 2020-1106, 2020 WL 2961939 (Fed. Cir. June 4, 2020) Munchkin, Inc. v. Luv N’ Care, Ltd., No. 2019-1454 (Fed. Cir. June 8, 2020)
DTSA Claims Without Sufficient Particularity Are DOA, Calendar Research LLC v. StubHub, Inc. et al., No. 2:17-cv-04062-SVW-SS (C.D. Cal. May 13, 2020)
SCOTUS: No Willfulness Required for Profits in TM Cases, Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., 590 U.S. (2020)
Bad Faith Needed for Injunction of Patent Infringement Threat, Myco Indus., Inc. v. BlephEx, LLC, No. 2019-2374, 2020 WL 1647245, (Fed. Cir. Apr. 3, 2020)
Ninth Circuit Overrules Copyright Inverse Ratio Rule, Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin, Case No. 16–56057, 2020 WL 1128808 (9th Cir. 2020)
The Place of Business is People, In re: Google LLC, Case No. 2019-126 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 13, 2020)
PTAB Cannot Cancel Claims for Indefiniteness in IPR Proceedings, Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc. v. Prisua Eng’g Corp., No. 2019-1169, 2020 WL 543427 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2020)
Special Patent Rights, but Only for Inventors, Proposed Legislation H.R. 5478, The Inventor Rights Act of 2019
Hot Sauce Trademark Infringement Order Creates Spicy Implications for Marijuana-Related Products, Tapatio Foods, LLC, v. Sulaiman Waleed Rodriguez, No. 119CV00335DADSKO, 2019 WL 6168416 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2019)
Ninth Circuit Reverses District Court’s Dismissal of Claims Alleging Taylor Swift Stole Lyrics to “Shake It Off”, Hall v. Swift, 782 F. App’x 639 (9th Cir. 2019)
Guiding Light to Motion to Amend?, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, IPR2018-01679, Paper No. 55 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019), IPR2018-01680, Paper No. 65 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019), and IPR2018-01682, Paper No. 62 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 16, 2019).
Whose Line is it Anyway?, SIPCO, LLC v. Emerson Elec. Co., 939 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
Allstate’s “Drivewise” Suit Against Kia’s “Drive Wise” Mark Finally Runs Out Of Gas, Allstate Ins. Co. v. Kia Motors Am., Inc., No. 18-55164, 2019 WL 4233634 (9th Cir. Sept. 6, 2019)
“District Court [Tool]barred From Ruling on Patent Eligibility without First Construing Claims”, MyMail, Ltd. v. ooVoo, LLC, 934 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
Samsung Dodges Forum Selection Clause to File IPRs, NuCurrent Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 2019 WL 2776950 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2019)
Sound the Alarm: Alarm.com Survives Alice Motion to Dismiss by Detailing Innovation, Alarm.com Inc. v. ipDatatel, LLC, 383 F. Supp. 3d 719 (S.D. Tex. 2019)
In Sony v. Iancu, Fed. Cir. Finds Everybody Wrong, Sony Corp. v. Iancu, 924 F.3d 1235 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
Federal Circuit Rejects USPTO Patent Eligibility Guidance, Cleveland Clinic Found. v. True Health Diagnostics LLC, 760 F. App’x 1013 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
Whimsical Fair Use Ruling Undermines Copyright Law, Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. ComicMix LLC, 372 F. Supp. 3d 1101 (S.D. Cal. 2019)
“Home is where the Hard Drive is: Fed Cir Allows E.D. Texas to Upend TC Heartland”, In re Google LLC, 914 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
USPTO Orders New Guidance: Hold the Mayo, 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance [Docket No. PTO–P–2018–0053]
Brewery Trademark Opposers Left Drowning in their Sorrows, Schlafly v. Saint Louis Brewery, LLC, 909 F.3d 420 (Fed. Cir. 2018)
Changes to the Claim Construction Standard for Interpreting Claims in Trial Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Changes to the Claim Construction Standard for Interpreting Claims in Trial Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Dkt. No. PTO-P-2018-0036)
150 N Wacker Drive Suite 700
Chicago, IL 60606
(312) 667-6080
© 2024 Irwin IP LLP. All Rights Reserved.
Attorney Advertising. The material and information contained on these pages and on any pages linked from these pages are intended to provide general information only and not legal advice. You should consult with an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction before relying upon any of the information presented here. The acts of sending email to any email addresses listed on this website or viewing information from this website do not create an attorney-client relationship. The listing of verdicts, settlements, and other case results is not a guarantee or prediction of the outcome of any other claims.
We use cookies to optimize site functionality and give you the best possible experience. By using this site, you agree to allow the use of cookies for analysis of site traffic and advertising purposes. Cookie Policy