Bailey Sanders is an Associate of the firm and has been practicing law since 2024. His practices areas include design patents, utility patents, copyrights, trademark prosecution, and IP counseling and transactions.
Bailey represents clients across a broad range of industries, with a particular focus on technology-driven businesses.
Bailey has extensive experience navigating complex intellectual property disputes, including matters involving patents, copyrights, and other proprietary technologies. He regularly advises and advocates for both individuals and corporations, from pre-litigation strategy through trial, demonstrating particular strength in managing the critical stages of litigation.
A skilled and strategic litigator, Bailey brings a results-driven approach to protecting and enforcing his clients’ intellectual property rights. He has played a key role in several high-stakes cases and is well-versed in the nuances of IP litigation across federal jurisdictions.
Bailey is an active member of the Chicago Bar Association and the Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago. He has participated in the prestigious Giles S. Rich Moot Court Competition—both as a competitor and as a judge—demonstrating his commitment to excellence in patent advocacy and mentorship within the legal community.
Beyond his legal practice, Bailey is actively engaged in community initiatives and remains committed to fostering education and awareness around intellectual property law.
Practice Areas
Bailey works with individuals to Fortune 500 companies helping clients enforce and monetize their intellectual property. Bailey’s clients are involved in various different technologies, including: wireless networks and related technologies, slot machines, gaming systems, networking related technologies, automotive technologies, internet transmission protocols, etc.
Prior to attending law school, Bailey obtained a Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics from the University of Alabama. While at Alabama, Bailey served as an Environmental Controls Engineer on Project Veritas, where he assisted in the design and fabrication of an earth-based lunar rover.
Illinois
Northern District of Illinois
University of Illinois Chicago School of Law, J.D., 2024
University of Alabama, B.S. Aerospace Engineering, 2021
USPTO Denies Ex Parte Reexamination Based on Prior IPR Challenge, Ex Parte Reexamination Control No. 90/015,984, U.S. Patent No. 8,810,458 (U.S.P.T.O. May 22, 2026)
No Standing, No Case: Patent Ownership Must be Airtight Before Filing, Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. Salesforce, Inc., No. 25-2026 (Fed. Cir. March 16, 2026)
Federal Circuit Shuts Down Attempt to Use IPR Estoppel to Stop Reexams , In re Gesture, Case No. 25-1075 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 1, 2025)
Federal Circuit Affirms $1 Nominal Damages Where Failure to Apportion Renders Damages Expert’s Testimony Unreliable , Rex Medical, L.P. v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Case No. 24-1072 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 2, 2025)
Fed. Cir. Ends Approach Employed To Make Challenging Patents As Abstract Ideas More Difficult , Optis Cellular Tech., LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 22-1925 (Fed. Cir. June 16, 2025)
No Rhythm, No Review: USPTO Director Skips a Beat on IPRs. , iRhythm Technologies, Inc., v. Welch Allyn, Inc., IPR2025-00363, IPR2025-00374, IPR2025-00376, IPR2025-00377, IPR2025-00378 (P.T.A.B. June 6, 2025)
Cut! GoPro Can’t Keep Cameras Rolling After IPR Estoppel., Contour IP Holdings, LLC, v. GoPro, Inc., Case No. 17-cv-04738-WHO (N.D. Cal. March 24, 2025)
Time To “Dew” It Again. , Dewberry Group, Inc., FKA Dewberry Capital Corp v. Dewberry Engineers Inc., No. 23-900, 604 U.S. (2025)
Maybe The Third Time Is The Charm After All., Nokia of America Corp. v. Alexander Soto and Walter Soto, IPR2023-00680, IPR2023-00681, IPR2023-00682 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 3, 2024)
Paws vs. Jaws: Dawgs Take on Crocs in The Federal Circuit, Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., No. 1:06-cv-00605 (Fed. Cir. October 3, 2024)
