Wayne Helge
Partner
(571) 208-0186
[email protected]
Wayne Helge is a Registered Patent Attorney and represents clients in all aspects of patent and intellectual property law, including litigation, post-grant patent challenges, patent and trademark prosecution, licensing, and technology-related commercial disputes.
Wayne is experienced in matters involving a wide variety of technologies, including computer-based threat modeling, power distribution systems, medical devices, online gaming and virtual reality software, imaging software solutions, fiber-optic communications and modulation, semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing, video encoding, flat panel displays (LCDs, plasma display panels, OLEDs) and driving circuitry, telecommunications devices and standards, and computer memory. He also is a Registered Professional Engineer and holds a Master of Science degree in civil engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, which he earned while serving as an officer in the U.S. Coast Guard.
Wayne has prosecuted hundreds of patent applications, including ex parte reexaminations. He is skilled at conducting inventor interviews and drafting and prosecuting original patent applications, with an emphasis on strategic claim drafting based on his extensive experience litigating patent infringement suits.
Wayne has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in federal courts across the country, including in the active patent litigation venues in Texas (Eastern and Western Districts), California (Southern, Central and Northern Districts) and Delaware. Most of these cases have been patent infringement cases, but Wayne also represents clients in technology-related litigation such as software license disputes, breach of non-disclosure agreements and trade secret misappropriation. litigation, and has prepared legal opinions and recommendations to avoid infringement liability. Wayne has negotiated and drafted many U.S. and international patent licenses over his career, covering from as few as one patent to entire patent portfolio licenses.
Wayne also has extensive experience representing petitioners and patent owners in contested disputes (inter partes reviews or IPRs) before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO), having appeared in more than 200 cases, most often as lead counsel. Wayne also has represented both complainants and respondents before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). Patent-related appeals are heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), and Wayne’s appellate experience includes briefing and arguing multiple appeals from both district court and agencies before the CAFC and seeking review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Education
- Roger Williams University School of Law, J.D., (2005) magna cum laude
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, M.S. (2000)
- United States Coast Guard Academy, B.S. (1997) with high honors
Court & Bar Admissions
- Supreme Court of the United States
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- District of Columbia
- Virginia
Representative Matters: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- Google LLC v. Dialect LLC: Defended patents relating to voice recognition technology inInter Partes
- Unified Patents, LLC & ecobee Tech. ULC v. Causam Enterprises, Inc.: Defended patents relating to energy management in Inter PartesReviews and handled subsequent Federal Circuit appeals.
- Various entities v. Oyster Optics, LLC: Defended more than ten patents for a top research, development and engineering company against more than twenty Inter PartesReviews and prevailed in each subsequent Federal Circuit appeal.
- Various Entities v. BiTMICRO LLC: Defended patents related to solid state drives for a top research, development and engineering company in more than a dozen Inter Partes
- Dataspeed, Inc. Sucxess LLC: Challenged patents relating to a retrofit unit for adding vehicle features for a leading autonomous vehicle control company in Inter PartesReviews.
- Cartessa Aesthetics LLC et al v. Serendia LLC: Defended patents related to medical devices in Inter Partes
- Bungie, Inc. v. Worlds Inc.: Defended early-generation patents related to image processing and virtual reality technology for a top research and software development company in six Inter PartesReviews, and successfully convinced the Federal Circuit to establish a new standard for determining compliance with real party in interest disclosure standards in Inter Partes
- Samsung Electronics America, Inc. 511 Innovations, Inc.: Defended patents relating to optical sensors in eight Inter PartesReviews.
- Google Inc. HBAC MatchMaker Media Inc.: Defended patents relating to advertising technology in Covered Business Method (CBM) Reviews.
- Samsung Electronics America, Inc. Imperium (IP) Holdings, Inc.: Defended patents relating to camera and imaging technologies in Inter PartesReviews.
- Huawei Device USA Inc. & ZTE Corp. v. Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute & SPH America, LLC: Defended patents relating to cellular signal encoding in Inter Partes
Representative Matters: Patent Litigation in U.S. District Courts
- ThreatModeler Software Inc. IriusRisk, Inc.: Asserted patents related to computer-based threat-modeling software against a competitor.
- Sucxess LLC v. ai, Inc.: Defended a leading self-driving technology company against accusations of patent infringement.
- Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Vieworks Co., Ltd.: Defended a leading technology company against accusations of patent infringement.
- Worlds Inc. Linden Research, Inc.: Asserted early-generation patents related to image processing and virtual reality technology against the software developer of the Second Life product.
- LiquidPixels, Inc. Heritage Auctions, Inc.: Represented a leading imaging software company in a lawsuit against a prior customer for trade secret violations.
- Cascades Computer Innovation, LLC v. Pantech Wireless, Inc.: Defended a leading cellular telephone company against accusations of patent infringement.
- MShift, Inc. v. Digital Insight Corporation et al.: Represented a leading application development company against accusations of patent infringement in District Court, and successfully convinced the Federal Circuit to affirm the victory in a Rule 36 Order.
Attorneys. Technologists. Trusted Advisors.
© 2021-2023 Bunsow De Mory LLP
Attorney Advertising. Past results are not an indication of future performance.