skip to main content
Receive client alerts and/or Silicon Valley e-News in your inbox.
Barry Herman is a member of Womble Carlyle’s Intellectual Property Group practicing in the firm’s Baltimore office. A chemical engineer by training, Barry litigates matters across a wide array of technologies in the chemical, mechanical, and electrical arts. He represents both domestic and foreign clients in a full range of patent, trademark and other intellectual property disputes before the United States Federal District Courts, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and the United States Patent & Trademark Office.
Barry has significant first-chair trial experience and has consistently demonstrated the ability to provide cost-effective representation by tailoring strategy and staffing to meet the needs of the client for that particular case.
Serving as first chair, Barry represented DynaEnergetics in a patent and trademark suit brought by GEODynamics in the Eastern District of Texas. After a four day jury trial, DynaEnergetics obtained a complete defense verdict, including non-infringement and three different bases of invalidity for each of the patent claims. At a subsequent bench trial on the trademark “reactive,” Judge Payne issued a judgment canceling GEODynamics’ incontestable trademark, finding that it was generic.
Barry served as first-chair litigator in a landmark patent infringement case for client Saint-Gobain, one of the world’s largest glass companies and the leading windshield manufacturer for European cars. Saint-Gobain won a $10.9 million damages award against a Chinese windshield manufacturer, and the jury found the infringement was willful. The district court subsequently doubled the damages award and awarded Saint-Gobain attorneys’ fees and costs for a total award of over $24 million.
Barry also has significant appellate experience at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In a seminal case involving the applicability of Section 102(g), Barry successfully argued that United States reproduction of technology conceived overseas does not qualify a United States manufacturer as a prior inventor under the statute. Solvay S.A. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc., 622 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2010). He has also represented other industry leaders such as DAK Americas, SMC Corp., and Mirowski Family Ventures in various matters in district courts across the country and before the ITC.
Barry has successfully represented clients (both patentees and petitioners) at the USPTO in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. Barry’s technical background, combined with his advocacy and cross-examination skills that have been honed through years of litigating patent disputes, make him ideally suited for IPR proceedings, either alone or in conjunction with district court litigation. For instance, he represented a defendant carpet tile manufacturer, Tandus Centiva Inc., in patent infringement cases in the Northern District of Georgia, inter partes reviews at the USPTO, and appeals to the Federal Circuit. Barry and his team successfully defended against a motion for a preliminary injunction and then convinced the district court to stay the litigation. The USPTO subsequently canceled all of the challenged claims of three the asserted patents, and the Federal Circuit affirmed (2015-1475, 2015-1668).
Barry has successfully represented clients in trademark, trade secret, and copyright litigation. Barry’s practice also includes drafting opinions and advising clients with respect to patent portfolio development, management and optimization.
Previously, Barry worked at a large intellectual property boutique in Alexandria, VA, where he was co-chair of the patent litigation and ITC practice groups. Prior to law school, he worked for several years as a chemical engineer, first in a hydrosulfuric acid manufacturing plant, and then in various oil refineries on the East Coast, where he specialized in anti-foulant and anti-corrosion chemical technology.
Barry has been selected by his peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America for the past several years in the fields of Litigation – Intellectual Property, Litigation – Patent, and Patent Law. In addition, he was named Best Lawyers’ 2017 Baltimore Litigation – Patent “Lawyer of the Year.”
Barry is currently the Chair of the Maryland State Bar Association’s Intellectual Property Section. In the community, Barry has served on the Board of Directors for Boys Hope Girls Hope Baltimore and is currently serving a two year term as Chairman of the Board. He also coaches baseball and basketball in the Severna Park Green Hornets organization.
Intellectual Property Litigation
High Technology Patent
Partner, Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Newstadt, LLP;
Associate, Arnold & Porter LLP
*Any result the lawyer or law firm may have achieved on behalf of clients in other matters does not necessarily indicate similar results can be obtained for other clients.