Zealous Advocacy or Objectively Baseless: A Cautionary Tale , In re PersonalWeb Techs. LLC, No. 2021-1858, 2023 WL 7267010 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 3, 2023)
Menu
Anthony Hao is an intellectual property litigator who strives to provide innovative solutions to his clients’ needs. Anthony has litigated a variety of design patent, utility patent, copyright, and anti-trust matters in federal district courts across the country, matters covering technologies such as automotive parts and computer software. Anthony has made significant contributions to the success of these matters, including drafting complaints and answers, drafting motion to dismiss and related responses and replies, managing discovery, draft discovery correspondences and motions, and conducting prior art searches. Further, Anthony also has experience in helping his clients through intellectual property counseling and mediation.
Prior to joining Irwin IP, Anthony obtained his J.D. from Chicago-Kent College of Law and his B.S. in Chemistry from the College of Science and Engineering at University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
Some of the matters on which Anthony has worked and his specific responsibilities include:
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
United States District Court for the Central District of California (Pro Hac Vice)
United States District Court for the District of Delaware(Pro Hac Vice)
Before joining Irwin IP, Anthony worked for a boutique patent firm that focuses on patent licensing and litigation. During his time at that firm, Anthony worked on many patent licensing matters on behalf of both domestic and international clients, covering a wide range of technologies including mechanical devices, search engines, media streaming, LED lights, and cameras. As a result, he has extensive experience in drafting claim charts and responses to invalidity challenges. He also provided crucial support in negotiating a patent license with a Fortune 500 company on behalf of a European client.
As a student at Chicago-Kent College of Law, Anthony worked at the IP Law Clinic where he provided patentability opinions on inventions related to software applications, mechanical devices, and gaming. While in law school, Anthony served on Chicago-Kent Law Review and Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property. He was a member of the Chicago-Kent Intellectual Property Law Society. Anthony is also the recipient of the Chicago-Kent Certificate in Intellectual Property Law.
Prior to law school, Anthony earned his undergraduate degree in Chemistry from University of Minnesota with a focus on pre-pharmacy studies. He has extensive work experience in retail, clinical, and specialty pharmacies.
Chair, Giles Rich Moot Court Competition Committee, Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago
Member, Asian American Bar Association of Chicago
Member, Chicago Bar Association
Chicago-Kent College of Law, J.D., 2021
University of Minnesota––Twin Cities, College of Science and Engineering, 2016
Illinois
USPTO
Mandarin
Zealous Advocacy or Objectively Baseless: A Cautionary Tale , In re PersonalWeb Techs. LLC, No. 2021-1858, 2023 WL 7267010 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 3, 2023)
Obviousness-Type Double Patenting is Alive and Well , In re: Cellect, LLC, No. 2022-1293, 2023 WL 5519716 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2023)
Experts Walk the Line: Avoiding Exclusion of Testimony as Legal Opinions, SB IP Holdings LLC v. Vivint, Inc., No. 4:20-CV-00886 (E.D. Tex. Jun. 15, 2023)
Spy Scheme Costs Plaintiff Its Patent Infringement Claims, Site 2020 Inc. v. Superior Traffic Servs., LLC, No. CV 21-63-M-DLC-KLD (D. Mont. Mar. 27, 2023)
Unreasonable Delay In Prosecuting Patent Costs Patentee $308 Million, Personalized Media Commc’ns, LLC v. Apple Inc.,No. 2021-2275, 2023 WL 328500 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 20, 2023)
Party’s Financial Resources Can Significantly Impact Attorney’s Fees Award, Whyte Monkee Prods., LLC v. Netflix, Inc., No. CIV-20-933-D, 2022 WL 4775905 (W.D. Okla. Sept. 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)
Inequitable Conduct: Solid Factual Basis Required to Satisfy Rule 9(b), California Costume Collections, Inc. v. Pandaloon, LLC, No. 221CV01323JWHJEMX, 2022 WL 1062056 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 7, 2022)
Manufacturers First, Customers Last: Customer- Suit Exception in Patent Litigation, Sonrai Memory Ltd. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., No. 6:21-CV-00167-ADA, 2022 WL 572301 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 24, 2022)
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.