Omitting Engineers in Design Patent Applications is Timeless , Apple Inc., v. Masimo Corp. et al., No. CV 22-1377, 2024 WL 4436629 (D. Del. Oct. 7, 2024)
Menu
Robyn Bowland joined Irwin IP in June of 2021. She is an intellectual property litigator and counselor with experience in a range of technologies, including computer software, telecommunications, and medical devices. Robyn litigates all aspects of patent, trademark, trade secret, and restrictive covenant disputes in venues across the United States.
In addition to litigation, Robyn also counsels clients regarding freedom-to-operate, patentability, and intellectual property licensing agreements. Prior to joining Irwin IP, Robyn was partner at a large law firm litigating a wide variety of intellectual property disputes across the country.
Best Lawyer (2025)
Rising Star for Intellectual Property (2015-2018)
Award for Excellence in Pro Bono Service, Northern District of Illinois and Chicago Chapter of the Federal Bar Association (2019)
Illinois Super Lawyer for Intellectual Property (2023, 2024)
Member, Chicago Chapter of the Coalition of Women’s Initiatives in Law
Member, The Richard Linn Inn of Court
Northern District of Illinois
Eastern District of Michigan
District of Colorado
Partner, Akerman LLP, Chicago, IL (2014-2021)
Associate, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP (2011-2014)
Associate, Brinks, Hofer, Gilson, & Lione (2008-2011)
Adjutant General Officer, United States Army (2000-2005)
University of Notre Dame Law School, J.D., 2008 (magna cum laude)
Winner, 2008 Federal Circuit Bar Association George Hutchinson Writing Competition
United States Military Academy, B.S. Mechanical Engineering
Dean’s List, All Semesters
Illinois
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Omitting Engineers in Design Patent Applications is Timeless , Apple Inc., v. Masimo Corp. et al., No. CV 22-1377, 2024 WL 4436629 (D. Del. Oct. 7, 2024)
Internet Archive’s Free E-Book Lending Not Fair Use, Hachette Book Grp., Inc. v. Internet Archive, No. 23-1260, 2024 WL 4031751 (2d Cir. Sept. 4, 2024)
Royalty Roulette: When Contract Amendments Disconnect the Patent from the Payment, Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. v. Insall, 2024 WL 3381286 (7th Cir. July 12, 2024)
Hey Siri, Are You A Tangible Product? Delaware Judge Said No , IPA Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, No. CV 18-1-RGA, 2024 WL 1797394 (D. Del. Apr. 25, 2024)
Check Your Clauses, MasterCard Gets Caught by Lack of Continuation After Termination , ALEXSAM, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee, No. 2022-2046, 2024 WL 825658 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 28, 2024)
Patents Have Mistakes; You Should Fix Them At The PTO , Canatex Completion Sol. Inc. vs. Wellmatics LLC, et al., Case No. 4:22-cv-03306, Dkt. No. 100 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 14, 2023)
Trick and Treat: File Fraudulent Declaration and Retain Trademark Registration , Great Concepts, LLC v. Chutter, Inc., No. 22-1212 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 18, 2023)
Ownership≠Authorship: No Copyright for AI System Owner, Thaler v. Perlmutter, No. CV 22-1564 (BAH), 2023 WL 5333236 (D.D.C. Aug. 18, 2023)
The Not So Long Arm of the Law: Limits on the Lanham Act, Abitron Austria Gmbh et al. v. Hetronic International, Inc. (June 29, 2023)
Federal Circuit Cooks District Court’s Decision to Add Bacon-Prep Inventor, HIP, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corporation, No. 22–1696 (Fed. Cir. May. 3, 2023)
CAFC Holds Priority Favors True Trailblazers, Not Maze-Like Paths Through a Forest of Prior Applications, Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., (Federal Circuit 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)
Defending Against Willfulness Without Waiving Privilege, Duke University v. Sandoz, Inc., 18-cv-00997 (D. Colo. Nov. 3, 2022)
High Speed Adult Content is “Purposefully Directed”, Will Co. Ltd. v. Lee, 2022 WL 3906205 (9th Cir. Aug. 31, 2022)
Indefiniteness: Multiple Term Interpretations, ClearOne, Inc. v. Shure Acquisition Holdings, Inc., No. 2021-1517, 2022 WL 1752627 (Fed. Cir. June 1, 2022)
First Sale Doctrine Applies to Component Parts Manufactured by Licensed Third Parties., Bluetooth Sig Inc. v. FCA US LLC, No. 21-35561 (9th Cir. April 6, 2022)
35 U.S.C. § 112(b): Reasonably Certain Patent Claims, Nature Simulation Sys. Inc. v. Autodesk, Inc., No. 2020-2257, 2022 WL 244065 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 27, 2022)
The Divide Continues: The Written Description Requirement Revisited, Novartis Pharmaceuticals v. Accord Healthcare Inc., Case No. 21-1070 (Fed. Cir. 2022)
An “Overly Demanding Standard?”: The Written Description Requirement, Indivior UK Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories SA, Case No. 20-2073 (Fed. Cir. 2021)
Willfulness and Enhanced Damages Standards Clarified, Sri Intl. Inc. v. Cisco Sys. Inc., No. 2020-1685 (Fed. Cir. September 28, 2021)
PTAB’s Institutions of IPRs Found Immune from Arbitration, In re: Maxpower Semiconductor, Inc., No. 2021-146 (Fed. Cir. September 8, 2021)
Section 101: You Will Know It When You See It, Int’l Bus. Machines Corp. v. Zillow Grp., Inc. et al., 2021 WL 2982372 (W.D. Wash. 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.