Samuel W. Apicelli

Partner

  • Samuel W. Apicelli
  • Phone: +1 215 979 1255

    Samuel W. Apicelli - LinkedIn Import to Address Book

  • Duane Morris LLP
    30 South 17th Street
    Philadelphia, PA 19103-4196
    USA

Samuel W. Apicelli is Chair of the Patent Preparation and Prosecution Division of the firm's Intellectual Property Practice Group. He concentrates his practice in all aspects of patent, trademark and copyright procurement and enforcement.

“PeroxyChem LLC has been working with Samuel Apicelli … at Duane Morris since March 2014. During this time, [the firm’s] representation of PeroxyChem has transcended the typical outside counsel/client relationship to become a true partnership. … Duane Morris has helped us navigate through a myriad of … complex patent issues, including patent litigation, inter partes reviews, M&A support, etc. Their strategic, efficient and cost-effective approach to helping us achieve our goals and solve problems truly sets them apart from other firms.”
- EVP, General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer, PeroxyChem LLC

Mr. Apicelli provides strategic guidance to executive management on the development and commercialization of products and services and the implementation of patent strategies. On many occasions, those strategies require enforcement by court action. He assists investors in negotiations and transactions involving intellectual property, including due diligence reviews of patents and trademarks, and assists parties in mergers and acquisitions involving intellectual property of all types. He regularly performs intellectual property audits to identify or locate intellectual property assets, including patents or patentable subject matter, copyrights, trademarks, domain names and trade secrets. Mr. Apicelli is often called upon to assist in the development and sale of intellectual property rights and licensing and financing for technology for a wide variety of companies. He also prepares intellectual property opinions of counsel, responds to patent demand letters and regularly assists in the settlement of adverse claims.

In enforcement and trial matters, Mr. Apicelli often assumes a second chair position in charge of marshaling the technical and patent law aspects of a case, including interface with experts, substantive discovery oversight and active participation in the development of strategies for the case at hand. Mr. Apicelli's familiarity with the underlying technology, the patents at issue, the prior art and patent litigation strategies allows for both efficient support of lead trial counsels efforts in the court room, and cost effective implementation and management of associate lawyers and paralegal staff. Mr. Apicelli is fluent in German. 

Mr. Apicelli's engineering, patent preparation and prosecution, and litigation experience includes:

Medical Industry

Mr. Apicelli's has extensive experience representing the medical device industry in a wide range of technical & medical specialties including, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, monitoring/imaging, orthopedics, prosthetics, pulmonology, medical information technology applications, 3-D printed implants, biocompatible polymers & coatings, cardiovascular catheters & probes, diagnostics, glucose monitoring, infusion pumps, minimally invasive & endoscopic procedures, robotics, spine, stents & valves, surgical equipment, and wound care.

Manufacturing

Mr. Apicelli’s experience in the manufacturing fields includes high speed metal stamping tools and systems; polymer molding tools and systems; high speed parts assembly machines and systems; fabric and garment fabrication methods and machines; and semiconductor device packaging and interconnection.

Electronics

Interconnection technologies and the mechanical design of electronic systems for use in Wan/Lan networks, including optical and wi-fi networks, fiber optic networks, internet telephony, radio, television, wireless local area networks, and encryption technologies.

Mr. Apicelli has written and prosecuted well over 1600 patents in a variety of technical disciplines related to mechanical and electrical engineering and has been awarded three patents for his own inventions.

With respect to his trademark experience, Mr. Apicelli has prepared, filed or prosecuted over 750 trademark applications before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and foreign trademark offices. He provides a comprehensive service on an international basis in the areas of trademarks, unfair competition, false advertising and the Internet. Mr. Apicelli's foreign trademark practice regularly includes the creation, maintenance, and exploitation of trademarks in Europe via the European Community Trademark Office and in individual country trademark offices. Mr. Apicelli also regularly provides due diligence audits related to trademark and other IP assets in the U.S. and abroad as required for sale, acquisition and securitization of those assets. His international work experience allows him to provide unique practical advice and counsel to companies in selecting, clearing and protecting trade dress, trademarks and domain names on a global basis. Mr. Apicelli has represented many clients in all aspects of the enforcement of their intellectual property rights in U.S. federal courts and administrative agencies, such as the USPTO, as well as before administrative agencies such as the European Community Trademark Office and individual country trademark offices, with the assistance of qualified foreign counsel.

Prior to practicing law, Mr. Apicelli worked for 12 years for AMP Inc., where he was a mechanical/electrical product development engineer, an international product and development engineering manager and later Director of Engineering for Southern Europe, Latin America and Asia Pacific operations. As Director of Engineering, Mr. Apicelli was based in London where he administered and had profit and loss responsibility for numerous product and manufacturing development programs. He acted as an advisor to the international management teams for the preparation of their yearly business plans. He also was a member of the corporation's Intellectual Property Management committee. One of Mr. Apicelli's duties in Europe and Asia was to work with the AMP's tax advisors to negotiate transfer pricing, royalties, and tax holidays with foreign tax authorities that were based upon or supported by technology transfer to those countries, as substantiated by AMP's foreign patent and trademark portfolio.

Pro Bono

Mr. Apicelli regularly represents veterans in appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in association with the Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program. The Veterans Consortium provides veterans and other VA claimants, who have been denied by the VA's Board of Veterans' Appeals, with free attorney representation in their appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. In Fuller v. McDonough, Mr. Apicelli successfully represented a veteran in appealing a VA decision on the effective date of when his wife should receive part of his VA benefits while he was incarcerated.

Representative Matters

  • Preferred Utilities Manufacturing Corporation v. ISP Automation Inc. – Patent infringement suit related to submersible housing for pumps.

  • GAN (UK) Limited v. Entain Corporate Services Ltd. et al – Represented GAN in a patent infringement matter.

  • Entain Corporate Services Ltd. et al v. GAN (UK) Limited – Represented GAN in Entain's IPR petition.

  • Certain Tunable Lenses and Products Containing the Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1282 (Violation) - In the Matter of Certain Tunable Lenses and Products Containing the Same (International Trade Commission, 2021-22) (focus tunable lenses): Supporting counsel for the respondents Optotune and Edmund Optics in patent infringement case before the ITC. Resolved on favorable terms.

  • Wright Medical Technology, Inc. v. Paragon 28 LLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-010691-STV (D.Colo.) –Represent Wright Medical in a patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation suit involving ten patents related to bone plating systems and related distraction device. Case resolved on terms client found favorable.

  • Cameron Lanning Cormack v. USA – Representing an inventor against U.S. Postal Service in patent infringement litigation regarding an automated mail sorting system.

  • ING Bank, FSB v. LBS Innovations, LLC –ING Bank, FSB v. LBS Innovations LLC, 2:12-cv-3809 (D.N.J. 2012) – Represented plaintiff ING Bank, fsb in a patent infringement matter relating to a banking information system.

  • Princeton Digital Image Corporation v. Activision Publishing Inc –Princeton Digital Image Corporation v. Activision Publishing Inc., 2:12-cv-1134 (C.D. Cal. 2012) –Represented plaintiff Princeton Digital Image Corporation in a patent infringement matter relating to a method and system for controlling computer-generated virtual environment in response to audio signals.

  • SignalQuest, Inc. v. Chou, et al -  Patent infringement suit against Chou regarding alleged infringement of a vibration switch including a housing with an accommodation chamber for receiving two electric contract bodies.

  • Represented Fultra, a Mexico-based provider of motor transportation equipment and parts in North America and parent company of Fruehauf, with patent and trademark due diligence in support of its acquisition of East Manufacturing, an aluminum trailer maker.

  • Spineology v. Wright Medical Technology (District of Minnesota and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2015-2019) (medical device: surgical reamer): Support counsel for Wright Medical in patent litigation concerning a surgical reamer. The Court granted summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of our client. Decision affirmed by the Federal Circuit on appeal.

  • AngleFix and UNC v. Wright Medical Technology (Western District of Tennessee and Patent Trial and Appeal Board, 2013-2017) (medical device: bone screws and plates): Support counsel for Wright Medical in patent litigation concerning bone screws and plates. Won IPR challenge against 27 of 39 asserted patent claims. In District Court, won motion to exclude key opinions of plaintiffs’ technical expert, and won summary judgment of non-infringement on 8 of 12 remaining claims. In the wake of those rulings, the plaintiffs agreed to dismiss their case with prejudice, bringing a major four-year litigation to an end.

  • Represented JPJ Group (formerly LSE:JPJ), a leading global online bingo-led operator, in its £490m acquisition of online gaming company Gamesys Holdings Ltd., thereby forming Gamesys Group (LSE:GYS).

  • Represented X Core Technologies, a leader in the metal smart card field, in a sale of domestic and foreign patents and patent applications to Idemia, a French multinational company specializing in security and identity solutions.

  • Represented Aqua Pharmaceuticals in a $650 million product acquisition from Allergan's U.S. Medical Dermatology Unit.

  • Represented H.C. Wainwright & Co. LLC, acting as sales agent, in a $12.5 million at-the-market (ATM) equity offering of common stock for Aethlon Medical, Inc. (Nasdaq: AEMD).

  • Represented FBR Capital Markets & Co., acting as sales agent, in a $4 million at-the-market (ATM) equity offering of common stock for Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: CYCC).

  • Represented a specialty chemical company in closing a $175 million credit facility, comprised of revolving credit, term loan, swing line and letters of credit sub-facilities. The credit agreement contains an accordion feature affording the client the right to increase the revolving credit facility size by $50 million.

  • Biomedical Enterprises, Inc. v. Solana (W.D. Tex) Representing Wright Medical in litigation alleging infringement of a patent pertaining to joint compression staples.

  • Secure Axcess, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association et al (E.D. Tex) Represented ING Bank in litigation alleging infringement of a patent pertaining to internet security.

  • Secure Axcess, LLC v. Ocwen Financial Corporation (E.D. Tex) Represented Ocwen in litigation alleging infringement of a patent pertaining to internet security.

  • David Wawrzynski v. H.J. Heinz Co., et al. (3rd Circuit) Appeal in case in which plaintiff claimed Heinz used his ideas in Heinz's Dip and Squeeze ketchup package.

  • Howmedica Osteonics Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. (U.S. Court of Appeals — Federal Circuit) Appeal from successful Markman hearing.

  • Peroxychem LLC v. Innovative Environmental Technologies, Inc., et al., Civil Action No.: 14-cv-6446 and Innovative Environmental Technologies, Inc., v. Peroxychem LLC, et al., Civil Action No. 15-cv-3145, Representing PeroxyChem LLC in litigation alleging infringement of patent pertaining to environmental remediation.

  • Represented NYX Gaming Group in a $105 million financing and acquisition of Amaya (Alberta) Inc. (f/k/a Chartwell Technology Inc.) and Cryptologic Limited. NYX Gaming Group has also entered into a preferred supplier licensing agreement with a subsidiary of Amaya Inc.

  • Orthophoenix, LLC v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc., and "John and/or Jane Does 1-100" (D. Del.): Represented Wright Medical in litigation alleging infringement of two patents entitled "Structures and Methods For Creating Cavities In Interior Body Regions."

  • ConforMIS, Inc. v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (D. Mass.): Represented Wright Medical in litigation alleging infringement of four patents related to the preparation of patient-specific cutting guides and fixtures for use in ankle and knee surgeries.

  • Browning v. Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc.: Represented Sturm, Ruger & Co. in litigation alleging infringement relative to U.S. Patents Nos. 8,156,675 and 8,484,875, both entitled "Firearm Magazine.”

  • Dr. Daniel S. Gabbay v. D.T. Davis Enterprises Ltd, trading as Hovertech International (E.D.Va.): Representing Hovertech International in litigation alleging infringement of United States Patent Nos. 7,127,758 and 7,383,599, entitled "Active Head/Neck Positioning Device for Endotracheal Intubation."

  • American Energy Corporation v. American Energy Partners, LP, et al. (S.D. Ohio): Representing American Energy Partners in litigation alleging trademark infringement.

  • Howmedica Osteonics Corp. and Stryker Corp. v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc., and Wright Medical Group, Inc., (D.N.J.): Represented Wright Medical in litigation alleging infringement of trademarks pertaining to knee prostheses. This matter was resolved by settlement.

  • Bonutti Skeletal Innovations LLC v. Wright Medical Group, Inc., and Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (D. Del.): Represented Wright Medical in litigation alleging infringement of a patent pertaining to knee replacement.

  • Howmedica Osteonics Corp. and Stryker Ireland Ltd. v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (D.N.J.): Representing Wright Medical in litigation alleging infringement of a patent pertaining to hip prostheses.

  • Good Technology Corporation v. Little Red Wagon Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Tex.): Represented Little Red Wagon Technologies in litigation alleging infringement of patents related to mobile or wireless devices or mobile or wireless networks, including secure mobile container, in conjunction with mobile app containerization, mobile exchange, synchronization, connectivity, access, security and mobile management products, software and services. This matter was resolved by settlement.

  • Ceecolor Industries LLC v. Oculis Labs Inc. - Represented Oculis Labs Inc. in this patent infringement litigation regarding a security system with proximity sensing for an electronic device.
  • Pi-Net International Inc. v. Capital One Financial Corporation, et al. - Representing ING Bank fsb in this patent infringement litigation regarding a value-added network system for enabling real-time, bidirectional transactions on a network.
  • Traffic Information, LLC v. Flixster, Inc., et al. - Representing ING Bank, fsb in this patent infringement litigation regarding a system for providing traffic information.
  • TQP Development, LLC v. Caterpillar Inc., et al. - Representing Safeway Inc. in this patent infringement litigation regarding an encrypted data transmission system employing means for randomly altering encryption keys.
  • Secure Axcess, LLC v. Bank of America Corp., et al. - Represented ING Bank, fsb in patent infringement litigation regarding a system and method for authenticating a web page.
  • Future Fibre Technologies Pty. Ltd. v. Optellios, Inc. - Represented Optellios, Inc. in this patent infringement matter and negotiated a stipulated consent order and judgment.

  • Represented a Virginia IT staffing and consulting company in connection with a two-step transaction involving a corporate restructuring in which the company contributed substantial amounts of its assets and liabilities to a Delaware limited liability company, which simultaneously sold its preferred units to a third party investor for $20 million.

  • Represented a corporation, based and operating in Kabul, Afghanistan, in a dispute against a U.S. government agency, in which the agency reversed its initial adverse determination and concluded that our client was eligible to continue to receive U.S. government funding.

  • Wawrzynski v. H.J. Heinz Co. - Obtained on behalf of a multinational corporation headquartered in Pittsburgh and two related entities a decision from U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denying the plaintiff's motion to dismiss the client's counterclaim challenging the validity of plaintiff's patent.
  • Stambler v. Atmos Energy Corp., et al., (E.D. Tex, Marshall Div.): Represented ING Bank against alleged infringement of a patent relating to data encryption. Case settled.
  • Stambler v. Intuit, Inc., et al. (E.D. Tex., Marshall Div.): Represented ING Bank against alleged infringement of a patent relating to data encryption; case settled after Markman hearing.
  • TQP Development, LLC v. Bank of New York Mellon Corp., et al. (E.D. Tex., Marshall Div.): Represented Walgreen Corp. against alleged infringement of a patent related to data encryption.
  • TQP Development, LLC v. Merrill Lynch, et. al. (E.D. Tex., Marshall Div.): Represented ING Bank, Sharebuilder Securities Corporation and Sharebuilder Corporation against alleged infringement of a patent relating to data encryption.

  • Conducted intellectual property due diligence in connection with the sale by Salar, Inc. of its 100 percent of its outstanding equity securities in a reverse triangular merger to Salar Acquisition Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of Transcend Services, Inc. (NASDAQ:TRCR), for $11 million cash.

  • Evco Technology & Development Co. LLC v. Buck Knives, Inc., et al. - patent infringement litigation regarding compound hunting bow technology.
  • Rudd v. Lipidex Corporation - patent infringement litigation between licensor and licensee over ventilation technology.
  • Howmedica Osteonics v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc. - patent infringement litigation concerning artificial knee implant technology.
  • J.P. Donmoyer, Inc. v. Building Materials Corporation of America d/b/a GAF Materials Corporation, and D.M. Bowman, Inc. - patent infringement litigation regarding off-site dry-bulk storage monitoring technology.
  • Wright Medical Technology, Inc. v. OsteoImplant Technology, Inc. - patent infringement litigation concerning modular hip replacement prostheses.
  • Woodlark Circle, Inc et al v. Stryker Corporation et al. - Trademark Infringement litigation concerning use of a foot print silhouette mark on patient transfer mattresses.
  • Wound Care Strategies, Inc. v. Wound Care Centers, Inc. - trademark infringement litigation regarding conflict use of similar names.
  • Maid-Rite Steak Company, Inc. v. Maid Rite Corporation - trademark infringement litigation regarding conflict use of similar names.
  • Doeblers' Pennsylvania Hybrids, Inc. v. Doebler, et al. - trademark infringement litigation regarding conflict use of similar names.
  • Cap Index, Inc. v. Intelligent Direct, Inc., et al. - copyright infringement litigation concerning crime mapping software.

    • Issued Patent

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 11,033,304, pertaining to metatarsal fixation device, system and method.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 11,020,130, pertaining to drill alignment guide.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 11,013,608, pertaining to talar bone plate.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 11,013,506, pertaining to partially assembled knotless suture construct.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 11,007,068, pertaining to instruments for preparing bone implants.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 11,006,988, pertaining to orthopedic plate for use in small bone repair.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 11,006,967, pertaining to cartilage removal tool and method.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,993,710, pertaining to syndesmosis construct.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,987,114, pertaining to instrument for intra-operative implant templating using fluoroscopy.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,966,764, pertaining to knotless suture locking bone plate.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,959,766, pertaining to wire tensioner tip.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,940,012, pertaining to talar dome with angled holes.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,939,922, pertaining to variable angle cutting guide and method of using the same.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,918,400, pertaining to procedure for repairing foot injury.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,893,878, pertaining to systems and methods for implanting surgical implants.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,893,877, pertaining to guided punch for talar augments.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,888,340, pertaining to method and cut guide for biplanar wedge osteotomy.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,888,336, pertaining to ankle replacement system and method.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,881,436, pertaining to implant with intramedullary portion and offset extramedullary portion.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,869,706, pertaining to fixation device for proximal humerus fractures.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,849,669, pertaining to method and device for insertion of orthopedic fixation pin with blind hole.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,799,364, pertaining to revision implant augments, systems, and methods.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,736,678, pertaining to compression plate kit and methods for repairing bone discontinuities.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,736,676, pertaining to orthopedic implant kit.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,736,645, pertaining to implant suitable for calcaneal osteotomy.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,729,453, pertaining to guidance system for hallux valgus correction.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,709,566, pertaining to implant and method for ankle syndesmosis treatment.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,682,168, pertaining to intramedullary implant with proximal plate and method for its use.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,660,671, pertaining to circular fixator system and method.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,653,465, pertaining to metatarsal fixation device, system and method.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,653,432, pertaining to osteotomy guide.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,631,900, pertaining to orthopedic compression/distraction device.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,624,674, pertaining to circular fixator system and method.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,568,744, pertaining to implant peg with multiple components.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,470,782, pertaining to guidance system and method for bone fusion.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,463,407, pertaining to fusion implant.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,456,265, pertaining to fixation mechanism for an implant.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,456,179, pertaining to intramedullary ankle technique and system.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,413,417, pertaining to stabilized total ankle prosthesis.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,413,308, pertaining to patient-specific surgical devices, systems, and methods.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,390,842, pertaining to geared instrument for tibial stem reaming or removal.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,376,286, pertaining to fixation device.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,327,906, pertaining to modular talar fixation method and system.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,321,922, pertaining to ankle replacement system and method.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,299,840, pertaining to hammertoe implant and instrument.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,292,743, pertaining to surgical staple.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,278,828, pertaining to ball and socket implants for correction of hammer toes and claw toes.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,226,351, pertaining to revision implant augments, systems, and methods.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,213,241, pertaining to method and device for insertion of orthopedic fixation pin with blind hole.

  • Prosecuted U.S. Patent No. 10,206,728, pertaining to fixation device for proximal humerus fractures.

Admissions

  • Massachusetts
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
  • Pennsylvania
  • New Jersey
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
  • U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
  • Supreme Court of New Jersey
  • Supreme Court of Massachusetts

Education

  • Franklin Pierce Law Center, J.D., 1993
  • Bates College, B.A., Physics, 1978

Professional Activities

  • Pennsylvania Bar Association
  • Member, Commercialization Advisory Board, Hershey Medical Center

Honors and Awards

  • Listed as a "Patent Star" in Managing Intellectual Property's IP Stars, 2013-2023

  • Listed in IAM Patent 1000: The World's Leading Patent Professionals, 2019-2024

  • Listed in "Irish Legal 100" by the Irish Voice, 2009

No aspect of these rankings has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Further information on methodologies is available via these links.

Selected Publications

Selected Speaking Engagements

  • "What Bankruptcy Lawyers Need to Know Before Advising Clients on the Effect of Bankruptcy on IP Licenses—Understanding the Latest Legal Developments and Trends and What They Mean for Clients," ExecSense Webinar
  • Moderator, "Let's Not Give it Away; Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights & Intellectual Property," Innovations Partnership's Conference for Science and Technology Entrepreneurs
  • "The Business of Art: Copyrights, Contracts and Intellectual Property," seminar sponsored by Jump Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
  • "Security Interests in Intellectual Property," Pennsylvania Bar Institute's Business Lawyers' Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
  • "Security Interests in Intellectual Property," Commercial Document Series, PBI, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • "Strategies for Inventors" and Internet/E-biz Risks," Central Pennsylvania Entrepreneur and Growth Company Day, Hershey, Pennsylvania
  • "Business Strategies for the Management of Innovation," 2010 ALMA Winter Gala and CLE Conference, New York City
  • "Intellectual Property for Small Businesses and Entrepreneurs," Murata Business Incubator, Carlisle, Pennsylvania and Kutztown Small Business Development Center, Dixon University Center, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
  • "Patents, Trademarks and Copyrights," Central Pennsylvania Entrepreneurial Development Center, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
  • "Patents, Trademarks and Copyrights," Pennsylvania Chamber of Commerce, E-Commerce Symposium, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania