the firm's post-grant practitioners are some of the most experienced in the country.


Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Digital Health
Digital Health
Energy & Renewables
Energy & Renewables

Fast Facts

About Our

Law Firm

About Our Law Firm

Headquartered within steps of the USPTO with an affiliate office in Tokyo, Oblon is one of the largest law firms in the United States focused exclusively on intellectual property law.

Get to know our


Get to know our History

Norman Oblon with Stanley Fisher and Marvin Spivak launched what was to become Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP, one of the nation's leading full-service intellectual property law firms.

Our Local and

Global Reach

Our Local and Global Reach

Outside the US, we service companies based in Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, and farther corners of the world. Our culturally aware attorneys speak many languages, including Japanese, French, German, Mandarin, Korean, Russian, Arabic, Farsi, Chinese.

A few of our


A few of our ACCOLADES

Oblon's professionals provide industry-leading IP legal services to many of the world's most admired innovators and brands.




From the minute you walk through our doors, you'll become a valuable part of a team that fosters a culture of innovation, client service and collegiality.

A few ways to

GET In Touch

A few ways to GET In Touch
US Office

Telephone: 703-413-3000
Learn More +

Tokyo Office

Telephone: +81-3-6212-0550
Learn More +


Patent Forms

Downloadable Patent Forms

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued final rules implementing the inventor's oath or declaration provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA) on August 14, 2012.

Oblon Files Petition for Certiorari in PTAB Standing Issue in JTEKT vs. GKN Automotive LTD.

  • December 7, 2018
  • Firm News

Oblon has filed a petition for certiorari after the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined its petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc on behalf of its client, JTEKT Corporation, an engineering and manufacturing company and subsidiary of Toyota. JTEKT found that its competitor GKN’s patent posed serious roadblocks and raised a potential risk of infringement for a product under development, and challenged the patentability of claims 1–7 via inter partes review (IPR2016-00046). When claims 2 and 3 were confirmed as patentable in the final written decision—and thus the risk of infringement remained—JTEKT appealed, and GKN moved to dismiss the appeal based on lack of standing.

The Court’s decision is a disappointment as the panel clearly overlooked facts and evidence demonstrating JTEKT’s potential risk for infringement and did not address JTEKT’s economic injury at all. “Although rehearing is rarely granted at the Federal Circuit, we were hopeful that the Court would have recognized the importance of this issue and its implications on other parties in the future. Because of the importance of this issue, JTEKT is proceeding to the Supreme Court.

“Unfortunately, the panel’s decision risks creating overly narrow, patent-specific laws that do not consider the broader law necessary to address standing in appeals from all agency actions,” said Lisa M. Mandrusiak, Senior Associate with Oblon. “This significantly limited view of standing undercuts the effectiveness of the IPR scheme and works to discourage these types of administrative proceedings because petitioners faced with invalid competitor patents during the product design process may have no recourse available.”

JTEKT’s petition for certiorari frames the issue as whether Congress conferred standing to IPR petitioners through the IPR statutory scheme.