Gene Bernard serves as the Managing Partner of the firm's Denver office. He counsels clients in all aspects of intellectual property strategy, with an emphasis on building national and international patent portfolios, developing cost-effective patent enforcement goals, and capitalizing on accelerated examination procedures. He regularly advises clients on defensive strategies including third-party patent reexamination and review proceedings, third-party prior art submissions, patent invalidity opinions, and design activities to minimize infringement risks.
Dr. Bernard is familiar with a wide range of technologies, including the fabrication of advanced semiconductor and flat panel display products; the development of cleantech and renewable energy technologies including second generation biofuels, commercial-scale methanogenesis, high-temperature ceramic fuel cells, and solar photovoltaic systems; and the synthesis of advanced polymers and ceramic materials. He works with preeminent companies in a variety of industries including consumer electronics, energy exploration and production, defense, chemical production, semiconductor fabrication, food production, and building materials.
With more than 17 years of patent experience, Dr. Bernard has drafted and procured hundreds of patents for some of the world’s leading technology companies. His years of experience in patent prosecution and reexamination give him deep insight into a patent’s vulnerabilities, enabling him to draft patents that deter future challenges. This experience complements his client counseling work on international patent procurement and management programs, intellectual property audits, and competitive analyses for established and developing products.
Dr. Bernard successfully represented a third-party requester in one of the first inter partes reexaminations filed with the USPTO, resulting in the cancellation of all claims in the contested patent. He has also successfully defended patent holders in reexamination proceedings brought by defendants during patent litigation and Section 337 Investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission.
Dr. Bernard has been an invited speaker at a number of seminars on changes to U.S. patent law brought about by the America Invents Act. He has lectured on the impact of the AIA’s Post-Grant Review and Inter Partes Review proceedings on strategies for patent prosecution and litigation.
Dr. Bernard was recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® for Patent Law in 2016 and 2017. He was recognized as a top patent practitioner in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 by IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners.
University of Colorado School of Law, J.D. (2001) University of Colorado Law Review, Technical Production Editor
Cornell University, Ph.D., Physical-Organic Chemistry (1997)
Cornell University, M.S., Physical Chemistry (1993)
Union College, B.S., Chemistry (1991) magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (1997)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
American Chemical Society, Member
American Intellectual Property Association, Member
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.