Will is an attorney in the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group practicing in the Washington, DC office. A mathematician by training, Will has advised clients on patent issues involving diverse technologies ranging from explosives to software to foodstuffs. In pursuing these matters, Will has represented clients before US district courts, the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the US International Trade Commission, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the US Supreme Court.
Will provides clients with a rare analytical perspective, and, in addition to his role as a practicing lawyer, Will is a tenured professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, where he teaches civil procedure and IP courses, researches complex IP topics, and directs the law school’s IP center. Through his academic appointment, Will invests substantial time and effort analyzing cutting-edge developments IP law, with a special focus on international patent law. Armed with these insights, Will anticipates problems on the horizon and cost-effectively develops customized solutions for clients facing difficult problems that can’t be solved through standard approaches.
Presentations and Publications
- Razing the Patent Bar, ARIZ. L. REV. (forthcoming)
- The Debilitating Effect of Exclusive Rights: Patents and Productive Inefficiency, 66 FLA. L. REV. 2045 (2014)
- The Competitive Advantage of Weak Patents, 54 B.C. L. REV. 1909 (2013)
- Competitive Patent Law, 65 FLA. L. REV. 341 (2013) (lead article)
- Inventing Norms, 44 CONN. L. REV. 369 (2011)
- Efficient Definition and Communication of Patent Rights: The Importance of Ex Post Delineation, 25 SANTA CLARA COMPUTER & HIGH TECH L.J. 327 (2009) (reprinted in 41 INTEL. PROP. L. REV. 45 (2009)
- Note, Communicating Entitlements: Property and the Internet, 22 YALE L., & POL’Y REV. 401 (2004)
- Organizer and Speaker, Copyright Realignment: Updating Copyright Law for the 21st Century, University of Baltimore IP Symposium, April 2016
- Invited Speaker, Patent Law, Innovation, and American Competitiveness, Marquette University School of Law, March 2016
- Invited Speaker, Razing the Patent Bar, UNH Intellectual Property Roundtable, November 2015
- Organizer and Speaker, Post-Grant Procedures at the Patent Office: Timely Cure or New Disease?, University of Baltimore IP Symposium, April 2015
- Presenter, Intellectual Property and Universities, USM Academic Transformation Advisory Council, May 2014
- Panelist, Supreme Court Series: Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies, American University Washington College of Law, April 2014
- Moderator and Panelist, Google Books: A Discussion of Legal and Social Implications, University of Baltimore School of Law, April 2014
- Invited Speaker, The Debilitating Effect of Strong Patents, Midwinter Patent Law Experts Conference, February 2014
- Panelist, U.S. Supreme Court 2013 Term Preview, University of Baltimore School of Law, September 2013
- Moderator, Who Owns the Rights to Your DNA, University of Baltimore Law School, April 2013
- Presenter, The Fracas over the Patents of Actavis, University of Baltimore Law School, April 2013
- Presenter, Understanding the $1 Billion Verdict from Apple v. Samsung, University of Baltimore Law School, September 2012
- Panelist, Patent Law in the 21st Century: Overhaul, Tweak, or Status Quo?, Southeastern Association of Law Schools Annual Conference, July 2011
- Lecturer, U.S. Intellectual Property Law, Goodwill Tour of Officials from the City of Tianjin, China, January 2010
- Advisory Council, Maryland State Bar Association Intellectual Property Section, 2015-Present
- Founder and Director, Center for the Law of Intellectual Property and Technology, 2014-Present
- Chair, Law School Faculty Appointments Committee, 2015-Present
Any result the lawyer or law firm may have achieved on behalf of clients in other matters does not necessarily indicate similar results can be obtained for other clients.
- Defended an international explosives manufacturing company in a patent infringement dispute in federal district court where the court ruled that the asserted patent was both invalid and not infringed.
- Defended a major telecommunications company in an investigation in the International Trade Commission involving multiple software patents, where the ITC ruled the asserted patents were not infringed.
- Defended a foodstuffs client in an infringement suit in federal district court, which held that the asserted patent was both invalid and not infringed and awarded attorney’s fees of more than $1.5 million.
- Submitted an amicus brief on behalf of a global technology company in the Supreme Court’s groundbreaking case of eBay v. MercExchange, 547 US 388 (2006).
- Represented a major telecommunications company in an international arbitration regarding a patent license agreement, where the arbitration panel reduced substantially the royalties paid from the amount demanded by the patent owner.