Lawyer Bio : James M. Lennon

Jim Lennon is a registered patent attorney and member of the Intellectual Property (IP) Litigation Team of Womble Carlyle's IP Practice Group. Jim began his career as a litigator in New York with the IP specialty law firm, Fish & Neave (now Ropes & Gray). His national litigation and counseling practice is now based out of the patent-centric District of Delaware. Jim represents parties seeking to assert, as well as those seeking to defend against, the assertion of patent rights.  Jim often helps clients achieve early resolutions when the parties wish to avoid the costly expense of patent litigation.

 

Jim won consecutive victories for Schlegel Electronic Materials, Inc. In May of 2008 Jim obtained an unconditional covenant not to sue for defendant Schlegel from plaintiff Parker-Hannifin for all of the patents-in-suit while Parker continued to litigate those patents against other defendants until May of 2009.  Later, in December of 2008, Jim won for Schlegel the enforcement of a settlement agreement against Parker further extending protection from suit for Schlegel’s future developed products.  Parker-Hannifin Corp. v. Schlegel Electronic Materials, Inc., 589 F.Supp.2d 457 (D. Del. 2008).

 

Recently, Jim won the dismissal of BIC Corp. in a patent false marking suit filed by Brinkmeier in the District of Delaware.  While Brinkmeier’s suits against other defendants continued and other false marking plaintiffs received settlements in hundreds of similar suits, Jim won an outright dismissal during the pleadings phase of the BIC case. Brinkmeier v. BIC Corp., 733 F.Supp.2d 552 (D. Del. 2010), reconsideration denied (D. Del. June 16, 2011).  This decision foreshadowed the outcome in In re BP Lubricants USA Inc., 637 F.3d 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2011), a case that was a frequent subject of Jim’s blog posts on false marking.  Notably the United States Department of Justice cited the Brinkmeier v. BIC Corp decision approvingly in its amicus in favor of mandamus for BP Lubricants.

 

In addition to helping parties achieve favorable settlements and early exits from burdensome patent litigation, Jim has also effectively used ex parte and inter partes U.S. Patent Office reexamination strategies to help parties shift their disputes to a traditionally less expensive dispute resolution forum when applicable.

 

While Jim's primary focus is resolving infringement and validity disputes and counseling on patent licensing matters, his experience includes deal negotiations and dispute resolutions in a variety of commercial settings.

 

Jim is also actively involved in pro bono matters for the Delaware Office of the Child Advocate.  Jim represents clients in district courts throughout the United States. Jim is admitted to practice law in stated and federal courts in Delaware, Pennsylvania and New York, and is registered to practice with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.