Cynthia A. Homan
Shareholder

Cindy Homan founded Brinks Gilson & Lione’s Appellate Practice Group and served for eight years as its chair. An accomplished appellate lawyer, she has briefed more than 70 intellectual property law appeals and consulted on many others. Her experience extends to circuit courts across the United States as well as the U.S. Supreme Court, where she has briefed cases at both the petition and merits stages. In addition to her appellate work, Cindy brings her broad legal knowledge and persuasive writing style to case-dispositive motions in the federal district courts.

As co-author of Patents and the Federal Circuit, Cindy thinks forward about where intellectual property legislation and case law are headed. Her research for the treatise informs her work for clients, providing fodder for creative, case-winning arguments.

A leader within Brinks Gilson, as well as in the broader legal community, Cindy serves as the firm’s diversity shareholder and co-chairs its diversity committee.

Practice Groups
Education
  • J.D.,
    DePaul University College of Law, 1981
  • M.L.S.,
    University of Pittsburgh, 1977
  • B.A., Russian Language & Area Studies
    University of Illinois, 1976
Bar Admissions
  • Illinois
  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Cir.
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Fed. Cir.
  • U.S. Dist. Court, N.D. Illinois
Languages
  • Russian
Experience | Overview
  • Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. Represented Progressive in a number of early IPR appeals arising from covered business method patent review proceedings under the America Invents Act, involving online insurance servicing technology and usage-based insurance. 
  • Phil-Insul Corp. v. Reward Wall Systems, Inc.  Represented Amvic Corporation in its successful appeal to the Federal Circuit for affirmance of summary judgment of non-infringement by Amvic’s insulated concrete forms used to create interlocking molds for wall construction.   
  • Star Scientific, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.  Represented RJR in successfully defending against an attack on RJR’s methods of curing tobacco to reduce carcinogenic, tobacco-specific nitrosamines in cured tobacco.
  • Hollister Incorporated v. ConvaTec Inc.  Represented ConvaTec in its assertion of a contractual-release defense to defeat Hollister’s patent infringement claim against ConvaTec’s bowel management medical device.
  • Edwards Lifesciences LLC v. Cook Incorporated.  Convinced Federal Circuit to affirm a grant of summary judgment of non-infringement by client Cook’s intraluminal grafts used for treating blood-vessel diseases.
  • Nitro Distributing v. Alticor Inc.  Represented Alticor, Amway, and Quixtar in their successful defense against antitrust conspiracy and related claims in connection with distributors’ decision to break ties with Nitro.   
  • Fort v. Chicago Housing Authority. Represented Ms. Fort, pro bono, in successfully overturning a CHA decision revoking her subsidized housing voucher.
Experience | Legal Experience
Brinks Gilson & Lione, Chicago, Illinois
Shareholder, 1987-Present
Member, Board of Directors, 2007
Chair, Appellate Practice Group, 1998-2006
Chair, Associates Committee, 1993-1995, 1997-1998
Chair, Library Committee, 1988-1996
Associate, 1981-1986
Experience | Non-Legal Experience

Brinks Gilson & Lione, Chicago, Illinois
Librarian and Docket Clerk, while attending law school, 1977-1981

University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Graduate Research Assistant, 1976-1977
Researching and writing about Freedom of Information laws.

Experience | Civic Activities
Lambda Legal
National Leadership Council, 2010-Present
National Board of Directors, 2003-2009
Board Co-Chair, 2004-2005
Forward Thinking
alert
March 03, 2017

On February 22, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp. to address whether the act of supplying from the United States a single commodity component of a multicomponent invention for combination abroad constitutes patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(1)...

book
October 2016

The Twelfth Edition of Patents and the Federal Circuit with 2016 Supplement is now available. ...

book
September 2015

The Twelfth Edition of Patents and the Federal Circuit is now available. ...

publication
2010-2015
publication
1998-2002
Presentations
  • "The Federal Circuit: Preserving the Wins, and Reversing the Losses," Brinks Gilson & Lione Seminar, "Managing the Risks of IP Litigation," October 25, 2005
Representative Matters
  • Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. Represented Progressive in a number of early appeals arising from covered business method patent review proceedings under the America Invents Act, involving online insurance servicing technology and usage-based insurance. 

  • Phil-Insul Corp. v. Reward Wall Systems, Inc.  Represented Amvic Corporation in its successful appeal to the Federal Circuit for affirmance of summary judgment of non-infringement by Amvic’s insulated concrete forms used to create interlocking molds for wall construction.   

  • Star Scientific, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.  Represented RJR in successfully defending against an attack on RJR’s methods of curing tobacco to reduce carcinogenic, tobacco-specific nitrosamines in cured tobacco.

  • Hollister Incorporated v. ConvaTec Inc.  Represented ConvaTec in its assertion of a contractual-release defense to defeat Hollister’s patent infringement claim against ConvaTec’s bowel management medical device.

  • Edwards Lifesciences LLC v. Cook Incorporated.  Convinced Federal Circuit to affirm a grant of summary judgment of non-infringement by client Cook’s intraluminal grafts used for treating blood-vessel diseases.

  • Nitro Distributing v. Alticor Inc.  Represented Alticor, Amway, and Quixtar in their successful defense against antitrust conspiracy and related claims in connection with distributors’ decision to break ties with Nitro.   

  • Fort v. Chicago Housing Authority. Represented Ms. Fort, pro bono, in successfully overturning a CHA decision revoking her subsidized housing voucher.
Press Releases & Events
June 19, 2013
CHICAGO — LAF, a nonprofit organization that provides free legal assistance to tens of thousands of low-income, elderly and disabled individuals in Chicago and suburban Cook County, has honored Chicago-based Brinks Gilson & Lione with its ...
Honors
  • Edmund James Scholar, University of Illinois
  • Beta Phi Mu honorary society for scholastic achievement in library and information sciences
Affiliations
  • Federal Circuit Bar Association
  • Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago
  • Women's Bar Association of Illinois
  • National LGBT Bar Association
Back to Top