John Pani
Associate

John Pani brings nine years of experience as a patent examiner at the USPTO to his work as an associate. He has experience with a wide range of medical device technologies, including systems and methods for bio-signal processing, tissue and fluid sampling, guidewires, and movement analysis.  John has further technical experience with online advertising, automotive systems, mobile devices, consumer goods, and food products.

Education
  • J.D., with Honors
    The George Washington University Law School, 2015
  • B.S., Bioengineering, magna cum laude
    University of Pittsburgh, 2004
Bar Admissions
  • Not Admitted in the District of Columbia
  • Practice Limited to Matters and Proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office
  • U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
  • Virginia
Experience | Overview
  •  In his extensive experience as a patent examiner, John evaluated a wide range of medical device technologies, including systems and methods for bio-signal processing, tissue and fluid sampling, and movement analysis.
  • John’s multidisciplinary background in bioengineering provides a strong foundation for a variety of client technologies, including medical devices, biotechnology, electrical engineering, signal processing, materials science, control systems, and mechanical engineering concepts.
  • At the George Washington University Law School, from which he earned his J.D. with honors, John distinguished himself as a three-time George Washington Scholar and also received the Chris Bartok Memorial Award in Patent Law for “exhibited excellence in the study of patent law.”
Experience | Legal
USPTO, Alexandria, VA
Patent Examiner, 2006-2015
Experience | Non-Legal
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
Research and Teaching Assistant, Bioengineering Department 2004-2005

University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
Research Assistant, Cardiovascular Dynamics Laboratory, 2003-2004

McGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA
Senior Design Internship, 2003-2004
Forward Thinking
blogpost
September 14, 2017
In a recent IP alert, Attorneys Miyoung Shin and John Pani, discuss recent case law. Please click here to read more. Contact Us Additional information about post-grant proceedings can be found on our Post-Grant Patent practice ...
alert
September 13, 2017

Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e), a final written decision in an inter partes review (“IPR”) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) results in estoppel of certain actions by the petitioner...

multimedia
October 26, 2016

In our continuing series, “Peeking Behind the Curtain – Explaining the Inner Workings of ...

alert
September 02, 2016

On August 30, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Veritas Technologies LLC v. Veeam Software Corp...

blogpost
September 02, 2016
On August 30, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Veritas Technologies LLC v. Veeam Software Corp. addressing a patent owner’s motion to amend filed in an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding. The Court held that the Patent ...
Press Releases & Events
October 25, 2016

On October 25 at 12:00PM (CST), in our continuing series, “Peeking Behind the Curtain – Explaining the Inner Workings of ...

Back to Top