Brent Babcock

Brent Babcock is the chair of Loeb & Loeb’s PTAB Trials Practice Group. He represents high-technology clients in every aspect of intellectual property disputes, focusing on federal district court litigation throughout the country, trials and post-grant patent proceedings before the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) (formerly the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences), ex parte appeals before the PTAB, and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) proceedings, including domestic and international arbitrations. His practice also includes pre-litigation counseling, pre-interference and post-grant proceeding consulting, ex parte appeal briefing and oral hearings before the PTAB, and appellate briefing and oral argument before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from decisions of the district courts and the PTAB.

Brent has extensive experience in USPTO trials and post-grant proceedings and has been involved in more than 35 patent interferences and many reexaminations during the past twenty-five years. He has also been involved in more than 140 recent Inter Partes Review, Covered Business Method Review, Post Grant Review, and Derivation proceedings before the PTAB. Brent’s experience and skills have led to him being repeatedly named one of the 40 top lawyers nationwide in PTAB post-grant practice by Intellectual Asset Management (IAM Patent 1000) magazine. 

Litigation and dispute resolution are Brent’s métiers; (he) is noted for his special dexterity in post-grant proceedings. . . . (His) years of interference experience and intense engagement in inter partes reviews (bring) strong leadership to the PTAB practice (and an) understanding (of) everything that can happen after issuance. Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) magazine, World's Leading Patent Professionals, Patent 1000 (client commentary)

His litigation practice emphasizes handling patent cases, although he has also successfully represented numerous clients in trademark, trade dress, copyright, trade secret, unfair competition, and false advertising matters. 

Brent’s cases have involved a vast array of technologies and products, including manufacturing equipment, medical devices, biotechnology and molecular biology, pharmaceuticals, semiconductor fabrication and processing, cellular communications, electronics and electrical devices, surgical procedures, electronic gaming and toys, and the automotive aftermarket.