Sterne Kessler’s appellate team consistently achieves critical wins before the Federal Circuit. Our work spans complex appeals arising from district court litigation, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings, International Trade Commission investigations, and other intellectual property disputes. Led by former Supreme Court, Federal Circuit, and other appellate clerks, we pair deep appellate experience with a proven record of success. But that is only half of it. Our team understands how to position issues in district courts and agencies before the appeal to set up the greatest chance of securing favorable outcomes later.
We are recognized as one of the leading firms for Federal Circuit appeals, with more than 300 appeals over the last decade. For two consecutive years (2024–2025), Patexia ranked us the single best-performing firm representing appellees in its CAFC Intelligence Report. We are also a Top 15 best-performing firm overall over the last five years and consistently rank among the Top 10 most active firms in patent cases at the Federal Circuit.
A Track Record of Shaping Patent Law
For more than 30 years, Sterne Kessler attorneys have helped shape U.S. patent law through appeals before the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. Our appellate team has litigated many of the most influential patent cases of the modern era, including Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, KSR v. Teleflex, and Phillips v. AWH Corp., and served as lead counsel in landmark matters such as In re Beauregard and In re Wands.
This experience lets our appellate lawyers address not only the issues presented in a particular appeal but also the broader legal and industry implications that can shape future patent enforcement, portfolio strategy, and innovation.
Beyond our direct role in Supreme Court cases, Sterne Kessler has prepared amicus briefs on behalf of numerous clients and industry groups in major intellectual property cases before the Court.
Leaders in PTAB Federal Circuit Appeals
Sterne Kessler is uniquely positioned to handle appeals from PTAB proceedings. Our firm runs one of the nation’s most active PTAB practices, and our appellate team regularly represents patent owners and petitioners in Federal Circuit appeals from inter partes reviews (IPRs), post-grant reviews (PGRs), and other America Invents Act proceedings.
Our attorneys understand how Federal Circuit precedent affects PTAB strategy. And, because we regularly litigate in both forums, we help clients develop coordinated strategies that preserve issues for appeal, strengthen the record, and maximize the likelihood of success at every stage of a dispute.
We have served as lead counsel in Federal Circuit appeals from the PTAB for clients including Hopewell Pharma Ventures, Meta Platforms, Netlist, Palo Alto Networks, Roku, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and the University of Washington, among others.
Representative Experience
- Provisur Techs., Inc., v. Weber, Inc., No. 23-1438 (Fed. Cir. 2024) – Obtained a reversal of denial of JMOL of non-infringement with respect to one food slicing machine patent, and a reversal of the district court’s finding of willfulness; secured a new trial with respect to damages on the remaining two patents in the case.
- Corcept v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, No. 24‑1346 (Fed. Cir. 2026) – Represented Teva in Hatch‑Waxman litigation involving Korlym®; successfully defended judgment of no induced infringement on the asserted claims of the remaining patents tried in the case.
- Vanda Pharmaceuticals v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, No. 23-1247 (Fed. Cir. 2023) – Represented Teva in Hatch-Waxman litigation relating to Hetlioz®. Invalidated all claims at trial. Affirmed on appeal and successfully opposed Vanda’s petition for certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Merck KGaA v. Hopewell Pharma Ventures, Nos. 24-1623 and 24-1624 (Fed. Cir. 2025) – Represented Hopewell Pharma Ventures in appeals arising from two inter partes reviews involving patents related to the multiple sclerosis treatment MAVENCLAD® (cladribine); successfully defended PTAB final written decisions invalidating all challenged claims, with the Federal Circuit affirming the rulings and later denying rehearing.
- In re Vivint, 14 F.4th 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2021) – Obtained reversal of PTO’s refusal to terminate an ex parte reexam request under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d).
- Military‑Veterans Advocacy v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 130 F.4th 965 (Fed. Cir. 2025) – Successfully challenged VA rulemaking; obtained partial vacatur of a VA regulation governing access to veterans’ IT systems, with the Federal Circuit holding the VA exceeded its statutory authority and engaged in insufficiently reasoned decision‑making under the APA.