Christopher T. McWhinney is a partner in ZAG-S&W’s Intellectual Property group in our Washington, D.C. office. Chris has over 18 years of experience in almost all aspects of intellectual property law, with particular emphasis in the acquisition and protection of patent rights. He is also experienced in litigation, client counseling and transactional matters. His litigation experience includes disputes regarding patents, copyrights and domain names. He has counseled clients on a variety of intellectual property matters with an emphasis on infringement and validity issues. His transactional experience ranges from mergers and acquisitions to licensing arrangements, joint ventures and collaborations, including agreements for drug discovery and research, manufacturing and marketing.
Chris’s technology experience began before law school, when he worked at the Medical College of Virginia investigating malaria. Today, his technical proficiency spans a variety of disciplines, including pharmaceuticals and the chemical, software and mechanical arts, in addition to various areas of biotechnology.
Representative Client Work
Chris regularly advises clients on the development and management of their intellectual property portfolios, particularly as it relates to patents and trade secrets. Chris has extensive experience representing clients related to their pharmaceutical and biotechnology related inventions, including work with several large branded U.S. and foreign pharmaceutical companies. For several years Chris managed a portfolio of several hundred active patent cases for a client involved in electronics, software and mechanical technologies and he handled numerous automotive patent cases for various German automobile manufacturers.
Counseling and Opinion Matters
- Counseling and analysis of patents relating to electronic medical devices
- Investigation and analysis of patents relating to pharmaceuticals and related formulations (handled a variety of clearance and other matters for pharmaceutical and biotech companies)
- Counseling on patent issues spanning a variety of technologies, including: location-based services in mobile telecommunications; earthquake monitoring; customer loyalty rewards programs; and carbon fiber fabric manufacturing
- Investigation and analysis of patents owned by the Lemelson foundation relating to bar code technology (this analysis correctly predicted the invalidity and unenforceability of these patents)
- Investigation and analysis of patents owned by the Ronald Katz patent portfolio (these patents relate to automated call center technology)
- Investigation and analysis of patents covering software related to shipping goods internationally (this analysis correctly predicted a later claim construction that significantly narrowed the scope of the relevant claims)
- PersonalWeb v. Vice Media, (N.D. Cal.). Representing defendant in patent infringement action involving digital file management
- TrustScience v. Bloom, (M.D. FL). Represented defendant in patent infringement action involving calculating credit and trust scores
- Guada Technologies v. Vice Media, (D. Del.). Represented defendant in patent infringement action involving Internet website navigation
- Travel Blue v. Sourcing Network International, (D. Del.). Represented patent holder in patent infringement action involving merchandise display stands
- Visual Interactive Phone Concepts v. US Cellular, (N.D. Ill.). Represented patent holder in patent infringement action involving systems for videophones
- Monster Patents v. Comqi, (S.D. NY). Represented defendant in patent infringement action involving electronic visual display systems
- Fowler Woods v. uLocate Communications, (E.D. TX). Represented defendant in patent infringement action involving online advertising (settled favorably prior to trial)
- Reese v. AT&T, (E.D. TX). Represented defendant Southwestern Bell Telephone in patent litigation involving telecommunications technology (obtained favorable claim construction ruling)
- SomaLogic, Inc. v. Santa Coloma, (BPAI). Represented patent applicant in interference directed to methods of obtaining biologically active molecules known as aptamers
- Pharmaceutical Solutions v. Vitamax RX, (D. MN). Represented patentee in infringement action involving veterinary pharmaceuticals (settled favorably prior to trial)
- Rossin v. Kanno (Guild Associates Inc. v. Hitachi Ltd.), (BPAI). Represented patent applicant in multiple interferences directed to decomposing perfluorinated compounds (obtained favorable final order)
- Nikon v. Leica Microsystems, (D. Del.). Represented patent holder in infringement case involving microscope systems