J. Scott Martin
What you should know about me:
I started my career as an engineer in the flight simulation industry, gaining valuable experience working for a company that specializes in developing flight simulators for military aircraft, such as MH-60Rs and C-130s. Shifting to the legal industry, I have practiced in many different IP areas, including patent preparation and prosecution, patent litigation, patentability and non-infringement opinions, IP due diligence for mergers and acquisitions, patent post-issuance matters, and procurement of trademarks and copyrights. My engineering and legal experience allows me to assist clients develop strategic IP portfolios that align with their business objectives. Understanding a client’s technology on a deep level and obtaining IP rights that reflect both the novelty of the technology and business objectives of the client is a passion of mine.
Scott represents clients in patent, trademark, and copyright matters. For patent matters, Scott practices primarily in the mechanical, electrical, and electromechanical arts. Scott has worked on a wide range of technologies, including aviation gas turbine engines, hybrid-electric and fully-electric propulsion systems, electric machines, power generation systems, flight navigation systems, unmanned aerial vehicles, vehicle data transmission systems, control systems, weapon systems, blast mitigation devices, augmented reality systems, energy harvesters, closed-cycle engines, connected appliances, computer hardware and software, and machine learning applications, among others.
Background & Credentials
- Wayne State University (B.S., Mechanical Engineering, 2009)
- Stetson University College of Law (J.D., cum laude, 2013)
- South Carolina
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- Stetson Law Review
News & Events
The Indefiniteness of a Limitation Precludes a Patentability Determination Only When Such Indefiniteness Renders the Patentability Determination Logically Impossible
Summary: In Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) was in error for failing to analyze the patentability of a claim containing indefinite means-plus-function limitations, stating that a patentability analysis is only precluded when …
Looking for a change of pace?
D&M is committed to empowering employees with the right training, tools, and resources to reach their highest potential. Explore opportunities for every stage of your career.