Kristina Caggiano Kelly is a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group, representing clients in all stages of litigation before the PTAB, International Trade Commission, district courts, Federal Circuit, and Supreme Court. She has experience in both inter partes disputes and patent prosecution in a wide variety of technological areas, including Hatch-Waxman filings, interference practice, and opinion work.

Before joining Sterne Kessler, Kristina practiced intellectual property law, as well as government contracts, administrative law, and other complex commercial litigation. She also has experience representing veterans in pro bono matters before the Court of Appeals for Veterans’ Claims.

Kristina also served in an 18-month clerkship for the Honorable Sharon Prost, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Kristina has industry experience in drug design and development, interning for Biogen, Inc., in Cambridge, MA, and worked as an assistant researcher in the Molecular Genetics, Microbiology, and Immunology Department at Robert Wood University Hospital.

Kristina received her J.D., Wharton Certificate in Business and Public Policy, from the University of Pennsylvania School of Law, her B.A. in molecular biology and biochemistry from Rutgers University, Henry Rutgers honors, and her B.A. in philosophy from Rutgers University, with the highest departmental honors.

Intellectual Property Litigation

  • In re Certain Electrical Connectors, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1043 (ITC 2018): Commission investigation regarding patented tine plates for automotive electrical connectors.
  • In re Certain Road Milling Machines and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1067 (ITC 2018): Commission investigation and enforcement of exclusion order against infringing road milling machines.
  • In re Certain LED Lighting Devices, LED Power Supplies, and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1081 (ITC 2019): defending importer of LED lamps against alleged 337 violation.
  • Luminara Worldwide LLC v. Iancu, No 2017-1629 (Fed. Cir. 2018); overturned PTAB interpretation of 35 U.S.C. 315(b) and secured holding that an adverse petition for inter partes review was time-barred.
  • Howmedica Osteonics Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc., No. 15-1232 (Fed. Cir. 2016): defending trial victory on claim construction and doctrine of equivalents in patent infringement action involving prosthetic hip implants.
  • BioMedical Enterprises, Inc., v. Solana Surgical LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-95 (W.D. Tex. 2016); IPR2015-786 (PTAB 2016): patent infringement litigation and parallel IPR involving surgical compression staples.
  • CardSoft LLC v. Verifone Inc., S.Ct. No. 14-1160 (2015): “GVR” petition granted by the United States Supreme Court vacating and remanding Federal Circuit claim construction of patent term “virtual machine” under clarified standard of review.
  • United Access Technologies, LLC, v. CenturyTel Broadband Services, LLC, No. 2014-1347 (Fed. Cir. 2015); No. 1:11-cv-339 (D. Del. 2016); patent infringement litigation challenging the scope of collateral estoppel for prior jury verdict involving ADSL broadband internet services.
  • Anglefix, LLC v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc., No. 2:13-cv-2407 (W.D. Tenn. 2016); IPR 2014-626 (PTAB 2015): patent infringement action and parallel IPR proceeding involving multi-angle fixation bone screws.
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Org. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Case No. 15-1066 (Fed. Cir. 2015); No. 6:11-cv-343 (E.D. Tex. 2014): patent infringement trial and appeal challenging damages award for technology implementing 802.11 standards for wireless LAN technology.
  • EON Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, Case No. 14-1392 (Fed. Cir. 2015): Patent appeal defending trial victory based on indefiniteness of computer-implemented means-plus-function claims reciting special programming for general purpose controllers.
  • Garnet Digital, LLC v. Yamaha Corp., No. 6:13-cv-00655 (E.D. Tex. 2014): Patent infringement action resolved on summary judgment in favor of client makers of internet media sharing devices.
  • SAP America, Inc., v. Versata Software, Inc., S.Ct. No. 13-716 (2014): Amicus brief supporting petitioners challenge to Federal Circuit application of Daubert to expert testimony in assessing patent damages.
  • Browning v. Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00013-CW (C.D. Ut. 2014): Patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation involving offset rotary magazines for rifles, favorably resolved through mediation.
  • In re Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Inv. No. 337-TA-855 (ITC 2013): Commission investigation of alleged Section 337 violation by import of motors and motor components accused of patent infringement.
  • Aspex Eyewear Inc. v. Zenni Optical, LLC, Case No. 2012-1318 (Fed. Cir. 2013): Patent appeal defending trial victory against collaterally estopped infringement claims regarding magnetically attached auxiliary frames for prescription eyeglasses.
  • LaserDynamics v. Quanta Computer, Inc., Case No. 11-1440, -1470 (Fed. Cir. 2012); LaserDynamics v. Quanta Computer, Inc., Case No. 06-cv-0348 (E.D. Tex. 2011): Patent infringement action against optical disc drives with multipurpose disc recognition capability.
  • Apeldyn Corp. v. AU Optronics and Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp., Case No. 08-cv-568 (D. Del. 2011): Patent infringement action regarding liquid crystal retarder switches in LCD display screens.
  • Affinity Labs of Texas, LLC. v. Volkswagen Group of America, Case No. 2011-1365 (Fed. Cir. 2011); Case No. 08-cv-0164 (E.D. Tex. 2011): Infringement action directed to Affinity Lab’s patented stereo systems with integrated portable digital audio devices.
  • Digital Impact, Inc. v. Bigfoot Interactive, Inc., (Fed. Cir. 2009): Patent infringement action against divided infringement claim involving an Internet-based business-method patent.

Hatch-Waxman Litigation

  • Allergan, Inc. v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-1455 (E.D. Tex. 2017); Case No. 18-1130 (Fed. Cir. 2018): defending ANDA for generic cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion drops (RESTASIS®), invalidating the asserted patents as obvious and opposing claims that the patents are subject to sovereign immunity after being assigned to the St. Regis Mohawk tribe.
  • Warner Chilcott (US), LLC v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., 2:15-cv-1471 (E.D. Tex. 2017); Case No. 18-1241 (Fed. Cir. 2018): defending ANDA for generic mesalamine delayed-release capsules (DELZICOL®) on summary judgment.
  • IBSA Institut Biochimique, S.A. v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., 1:18-cv-555 (D. Del. 2019): invalidating patent to levothyroxine sodium (TIROSINT®) as indefinite at Markman stage.
  • HZNP Meds. LLC v. Actavis Labs. UT, Inc., 17-2149 (Fed. Cir. 2019): defending trial victory refuting infringement claims for generic diclofenac sodium topical solution (PENNSAID®).
  • Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., v. Eurand Inc., S.Ct. No. 12-514 (2013): Brief of amicus Generic Pharmaceutical Association supporting Mylan challenge to Federal Circuit standard for bioequivalent follow-on drugs.
  • Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., S.Ct. No 12-416 (2013): Representing amici supporting respondent position that so-called “reverse payments” settling Hatch-Waxman litigation are not anti-competitive.
  • Aventis Pharma S.A. and Sanofi-Aventis U.S., LLC v. Hospira, Inc., (Fed. Cir. 2012): Aventis Pharma S.A. and Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC v. Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp., Case No. 08-496 (GMS) (D. Del. 2010): Patent infringement action and subsequent appeal regarding Apotex’s ANDA to make a generic version of Sanofi-Aventis’ anti-cancer product TAXOTERE® (docetaxel).
  • Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Case No. 09-097 (E.D. Tex. 2010): Patent infringement action regarding Sandoz’s ANDA to make a generic version of Allergan’s eye pressure drops COMBIGAN® (brimonidine tartrate/timolol maleat).

Government Contracting and Administrative Law

  • Ingham Regional Med. Center v. United States, No. 2016-2081 (Fed. Cir. 2017); overturned Court of Federal Claims’ dismissal for failure to state a claim in class action breach of contract regarding Tricare underpayments to hospitals.
  • United States v. MWI Corp., S.Ct. No. 16-361 (2017) challenging D.C. Circuit holding on the scope of liability for government contractors under the False Claims Act in light of the scienter analysis of Halo Electronics.
  • Kingdomware Techs. Inc., v. United States, S.Ct. No. 14-916 (2016): Representing 18 veteran and service-disabled veteran-owned businesses and organizations as amici before the United States Supreme Court in overturning agency interpretation of statutorily-mandated government contracting quotas.
  • United States v. SunRise Academy, Case No. 13-3071 (D.C. Cir. 2015): Forfeiture appeal regarding standing of third party victim to challenge a criminal forfeiture order through an ancillary civil proceeding.
  • Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Deloitte, No. 1:15-mc-22175 (S.D. Fla. 2015); SEC v. Syron, No. 11-cv-9201 (S.D.N.Y. 2016); SEC v. Mudd, No. 11-cv-9202 (S.D.N.Y. 2016); defending conservator Federal Housing Finance Agency in administrative enforcement proceeding re Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac oversight.
  • Hammer v. McDonald, Case No. 13-2263 (USCAVC 2015): Obtained requested relief on behalf of a pro bono Vietnam War veteran in appeal of denial of benefits for service-connected hearing loss and tinnitus.
  • Amy Mitchell v. MSPB, No. 13-3056 (Fed. Cir. 2013): Appeal of federal employee termination based on statutory and regulatory interpretation of agency jurisdiction, oral argument available at 2013-3056.mp3.

  • Patexia, “The 100 Best Performing Attorneys Representing Patent Owners – PTAB” (2023)
  • Super Lawyers, “Super Lawyer – Washington, DC” (2024)

  • J.D., Wharton Certificate in Business and Public Policy, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
  • B.A., Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, Rutgers University, Henry Rutgers honors
  • B.A., Philosophy, Rutgers University, highest departmental honors

  • District of Columbia
  • New Jersey
  • Pennsylvania
  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
  • United States Patent & Trademark Office

  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Hosted Event

Free Intellectual Property Legal Clinic for Small Businesses

Sterne Kessler's Office, April 30, 2024 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM EDT

Webinar

LEAP Webinar: AIA Oral Argument Encore

Virtual, September 17, 2021 12:00 PM - 2:00 PM EST

Speaking Engagement

The Sedona Conference’s Patent Conference (Part 2): Promoting Invention, Entrepreneurship, Economic Growth, and Job Creation

Washington, DC, Covington & Burling LLP, June 28, 2019 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM EST

Speaking Engagement

The Sedona Conference’s Patent Conference: Promoting Invention, Entrepreneurship, Economic Growth, and Job Creation

Washington, DC, Covington & Burling LLP, January 17, 2019

Related News & Insights

From Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Press Release

April 25, 2024

Eighteen Sterne Kessler Attorneys Recognized as 2024 “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars”

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

In the News

February 28, 2024

Jury Awards Wirtgen $12.9M Against Caterpillar in Milling Machine Lawsuit

Equipment World

Firm Announcements

February 27, 2024

Sterne Kessler and Patterson IP Law Team Up to Secure $12.9M Wirtgen Win Over Caterpillar

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

In the News

February 27, 2024

Caterpillar Owes Deere $13 Million in Road-Milling Patent Trial

Bloomberg Law

In the News

February 26, 2024

Caterpillar to Pay Wirtgen $12.9M in Damages After Patent Battle

Construction Briefing

Bylined Articles

February 8, 2024

Federal Circuit Cases Exploring a Year of Rules, Rulemaking, and Rule Enforcement at the PTAB

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Reports

February 8, 2024

2023 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Multiple Authors

Press Release

February 8, 2024

Award-Winning PTAB Team Publishes 2023 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends Report

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

Bylined Articles

January 24, 2024

Shaping the PTAB’s Rulemaking and Rule Enforcement Authority

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Press Release

January 24, 2024

Sterne Kessler Publishes Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions Report

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

Reports

January 22, 2024

Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions (8th Edition)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

January 8, 2024

Hyatt v Vidal: the penultimate chapter in patent law’s longest saga?

Managing IP Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

December 7, 2023

Analyzing the ITC's impending import ban on Apple watches

Reuters Multiple Authors

In the News

October 11, 2023

DNA Sequencing Patent Survives Guardant PTAB Challenge

Law360

Press Release

September 18, 2023

Sterne Kessler Achieves Top Litigation Rankings in Patexia’s 2023 PTAB Intelligence Report

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

Bylined Articles

July 31, 2023

Is Federal Circuit on the Verge of Upending Harmonious Co-Existence Between Design Patents and Utility Patents?

Thomson Reuters Westlaw Today Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

May 4, 2023

Preserving Issues for Appeal: How a Prison Litigation Case May Affect Patent Law

Thomson Reuters Westlaw Today Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

February 15, 2023

Bad Spaniel's: Barking the Line Between Permitted Parody and Trademark Infringement

Westlaw Today Multiple Authors

Press Release

February 7, 2023

Sterne Kessler Publishes Report Examining Key 2022 Federal Circuit Rulings on PTAB and ITC Appeals

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

Bylined Articles

February 6, 2023

Kyocera Senco Indus. Tools v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 22 F.4th 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2022) (Moore, Dyk, Cunningham)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Reports

February 6, 2023

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

February 6, 2023

DBN Holding v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 26 F.4th 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2022) (Moore, Newman, Reyna)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Bylined Articles

November 30, 2022

Supreme Court Poised To Alter Patentability of Pharmaceutical, Life-Science Innovations

Westlaw Today Multiple Authors

Firm Announcements

June 9, 2022

Sterne Kessler and D.C. Bar Pro Bono Center Host Sixth Annual Small Business Clinic

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

In the News

May 17, 2022

Law360 Names Attys Who Moved Up The Firm Ranks In Q1

Law360

In the News

April 19, 2022

Fed. Circ. Revives Rovi Patent That Comcast Got PTAB To Ax

Law360

In the News

March 14, 2022

Almirall Loses Appeal on Acne Treatment Patent at Fed. Cir.

Bloomberg Law

In the News

March 14, 2022

Fed. Circ. Affirms PTAB's Ax of Acne Drug Patent

Law360

Press Release

February 7, 2022

Sterne Kessler Releases Report Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

Reports

February 3, 2022

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

February 3, 2022

SynQor, Inc. v. Vicor Corp., 988 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2021)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Bylined Articles

February 3, 2022

John Bean Techs. Corp. v. Morris & Assocs., Inc., 988 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2021)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Press Release

January 5, 2022

Sterne Kessler Elects Four New Directors and Promotes Four Associates to Counsel

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox

PTAB Strategies and Insights

September 28, 2021

PTAB Strategies and Insights - September 2021

Jason D. Eisenberg, Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Bylined Articles

September 28, 2021

Observations from the September 17, 2021, LEAP Arguments and Bench Discussion

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

In the News

May 4, 2021

IP Clinic Helps Protect Businesses' Intangibles

Washington Lawyer Magazine

Reports

January 26, 2021

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

January 26, 2021

Nike, Inc. v. Adidas AG, 955 F.3d 45 (Fed. Cir. 2020) and Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, 966 F.3d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

In the News

November 3, 2020

Justices Skip Case Horizon Said Puts 32K Patents At Risk

Law360

Press Release

October 8, 2020

Sterne Kessler Client Wins 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for CRISPR-Cas9 Technology

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

In the News

October 1, 2020

Teva Unit Tells High Court Not To Take Up Horizon's IP Loss

Law360

In the News

July 31, 2020

Teva Gets Fed. Circ. to Affirm Thyroid Patent is Indefinite

Law360

In the News

May 19, 2020

CIT Clears Wirtgen Imports Over CBP's Patent Objections

Law360

Bylined Articles

May 1, 2020

INSIGHT: The Scope of a Sextillion—How Courts Misapply Law of Enablement to Life Sciences

Bloomberg Law Paul A. Calvo, Ph.D., Kristina Caggiano Kelly

In the News

April 28, 2020

Pro Bono Center Continues to Serve Residents Through COVID-19

D.C. Bar

PTAB Strategies and Insights

April 23, 2020

PTAB Strategies and Insights - April 2020

Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

April 23, 2020

The Federal Circuit's COVID-19 Response Suggests A New Approach To Oral Argument, Especially In PTAB Cases

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

Press Release

April 16, 2020

Sterne Kessler Hosts Virtual Pro Bono Clinic for Small Businesses

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

In the News

April 15, 2020

PTAB Probes Claim Construction Standard In Dental IP Case

Law360

Client Alert

February 3, 2020

IP Hot Topic: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions

Michael Joffre, Ph.D.

Press Release

February 3, 2020

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Summarizes Key Decisions in 2019 Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB Report

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

In the News

February 3, 2020

Amgen Asks Fed. Circ. To Review Merck's $2.5B Patent Loss

Law360

In the News

January 29, 2020

Full Fed. Circ. Told Ruling 'Jeopardizes' Design Patents

Law360

Reports

January 24, 2020

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Multiple Authors

Bylined Articles

January 24, 2020

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Semiconductor Components Indus., LLC, 926 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox Kristina Caggiano Kelly

In the News

April 29, 2019

Law Firms: Legal Actions, Decisions

Bloomberg Law

In the News

April 26, 2019

Detained Children, Sponsors Get Cert. In Policy Challenge

Law360

In the News

April 16, 2019

Fitness Co. Seeks Ban On Nautilus Elliptical Machine Imports

Law360

Reports

February 19, 2019

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. Multiple Authors

Reports

March 1, 2018

2018 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2017 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. Multiple Authors