Recent Trends in Patent Infringement Lawsuits, Chapter No. 1: “False Marking Claims,” Thomson Reuters, 2011
Michael Bregenzer joined Irwin IP as a Senior Attorney in 2020, and is now a partner in the firm. Michael has over 25 years of experience in intellectual property and complex commercial litigation; transactional matters, including mergers and acquisitions, and IP licensing negotiations. Prior to joining Irwin IP, Michael was General Counsel at Ranir, LLC, a successful private equity owned business, where he was responsible for all legal matters. This experience provided Michael with the understanding of the issues and pressures facing in-house attorneys and has led to a pragmatic approach to litigation guided by the client’s best interests. Before joining Ranir, Michael was an IP litigation partner at two of the world’s largest law firms.
States of Illinois, Michigan, and Nevada
U.S. District Court for Northern District of Illinois, including Trial Bar
U.S. District Court for Western District of Michigan
Federal Circuit Court of Appeals
Served as General Counsel and Corporate Secretary responsible for all aspects of legal affairs for Ranir, LLC, which was subsequently acquired by Perrigo Company plc. Mike was also a Partner at Reed Smith LLP with practice focused on intellectual property litigation and complex commercial litigation, including patent litigation, contractual disputes, Lanham Act claims, and other claims involving business torts. And before joining Reed Smith, Michael was a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP in its Intellectual Property practice.
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois J.D., 1994 (cum laude)
Articles Editor—The Elder Law Journal
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame B.A., History and Philosophy, 1991
Honors Program—Graduated with Distinction
Phi Alpha Theta—History Honors Fraternity
Recent Trends in Patent Infringement Lawsuits, Chapter No. 1: “False Marking Claims,” Thomson Reuters, 2011
Protective Orders Line By Line: A Detailed Look at Protective Orders and How to Change Them to Meet Your Needs, Aspatore Books, 2009
“Have Made Rights: A Trap for the Unwary,” Intellectual Property Today, 2003
Sheeran Strikes a Chord: Second Circuit Finds No Infringement of “Let’s Get It On”, Structured Asset Sales, LLC v. Sheeran, No. 18-cv-5839 (2d Cir. Nov. 1, 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)
Obtaining Attorneys’ Fees: Exceptional Facts, Not Policy , Lontex Corp. v. Nike, Inc., 107 F.4th 139 (3d Cir. 2024)
The Limit Does Not Exist: No Time Limitation on Copyright Damages , Warner Chappell Music v. Nealy, No. 22-1078, 601 U.S. (2024)
Rapper Fat Joe Accused of Denying Rights in Hit Single, Elliott v. Cartagena, No. 22-225 (October 17, 2023, 2d Cir.)
A Rare Injunction In An Injunction-less Patent System , Wonderland Switzerland AG v. Evenflo Co. Inc., Case No. 23-2043 (Fed. Cir. 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)
American Purchasers Poke Holes in Swiss Cheese Certification, Interprofession du Gruyere v. US Dairy Exp. Council, No. 22–1041 (Fourth Cir. Mar. 3, 2023)
Check Trademark Application ID Categories Twice, File Once, Fender Musical Instruments Corp. v. Win-D-Fender, LLC, Case No. 91272326
Damages Retrial Awarded After CAFC Decision Issues Mid Trial, Epistar Corporation v. Lowes Companies, Inc., et al., 17-CV-03219 (CD CA Oct. 25, 2022)
Section 101 Survives Attack, In re Killian, No. 2021-2113, 2022 WL 3589496 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 23, 2022)
Identifying Facial or Factual Challenges to Jurisdiction, Mitek Sys., Inc. v. United States Automobile Association, 2022 WL 1592453 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2022)
Section 337 Technical Domestic Industry: Actual Article, Broadcom Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 28 F.4th 240 (Fed. Cir. 2022)
Publicly Available Information Does Not Bar Trade Secret Injunction, Masimo Corp. v. True Wearables, Inc., 2021-2146 (Fed. Cir. January 24, 2022)
CAFC Balances the Patent Infringement Pleading Burden, Bot M8 LLC v. Sony Corp. of Am., 4 F.4th 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2021)
9th Circuit Denies Public Performance Rights for Owners of Pre-1972 Recordings Under California Copyright Common Law, Flo & Eddie, Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio, No. 17-55844 (9th Cir. Aug. 23, 2021)
How to Prove Infringement and Appeal It, CommScope Techs. LLC v. Dali Wireless Inc., 2021 WL 3731854 (Fed. Cir. 2021)
Another Texas Mandamus Ruling, In re Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., No. 2021-139, 2021 WL 2672136
Snap Judgment? Federal Circuit upholds motion to dismiss based on 35 U.S.C. § 101 Invalidity, YANBIN YU, ZHONGXUAN ZHANG v. APPLE INC., (CAFC, 06/11/2021)
CAFC Expands Personal Jurisdiction Beyond Red Wing, Trimble Inc. v. PerDiemCo LLC, 2021 WL 1898127 (Fed. Cir. May 12, 2021)
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.