Greg Polins advises clients on intellectual property disputes, with a focus on patent litigation and trade secret matters.

Greg draws on extensive trial and appellate experience to represent companies in high-stakes intellectual property disputes involving:

  • Patent infringement
  • Trade secret misappropriation
  • Trademark infringement
  • False advertising
  • Patent licensing

A key member of trial teams, Greg conducts direct and cross-examinations of fact and expert witnesses at trial, and argues motions at all stages of discovery, trial, and at claim construction hearings. Greg draws on significant experience before Federal Circuit courts, including successfully arguing four appeals resulting in Rule 36 affirmances of USPTO decisions invalidating over 100 asserted claims.

Greg regularly represents clients in multi-forum patent and trade secret disputes spanning district court proceedings, ITC investigations, and USPTO post-grant proceedings. He has extensive familiarity with semiconductor, memory, and medical device technologies, as well as security, cryptography, network communications, and software. Greg also works with automotive technologies in product liability cases for major commercial manufacturers.

Complementing his commercial work, Greg maintains an active pro bono practice, working with the Michigan Innocence Clinic to represent defendants in criminal appeals and re-trials, as well as helping students with disabilities obtain appropriate education through enforcing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

He has served as an adjunct professor of legal writing at Chicago-Kent College of Law.

Before joining Latham, Greg worked at another global law firm. Prior to law school, he created software for the equities trading desk at Lehman Brothers and developed web software at ESPN.

Greg’s experience includes representing:

Patent Litigation and Trade Secret Matters

  • A technology company in a patent infringement suit against a competitor related to mobile heart monitoring technology*
  • A manufacturer of foot and ankle medical device technology in a patent infringement and trade secret suit brought by a competitor in district court, USPTO, and Federal Circuit proceedings*
  • A generic drug manufacturer in a trade secret suit against a competitor founded by an ex-employee*
  • A cochlear implant manufacturer in a patent infringement suit against a competitor in district court, ITC, and USPTO proceedings*
  • A semiconductor manufacturing company and material engineering company in a patent infringement suit by an entity seeking one of the largest patent litigation damages award to date*
  • A crypto-coin producer in a patent infringement suit related to cooling technology*
  • A semiconductor manufacturing company in a patent infringement suit related to microprocessor architecture brought by a patent assertion entity*
  • A paint manufacturer in a patent infringement suit against a competitor relating to can coating technology*
  • A telecommunication company in a patent infringement suit involving Voice-Over-IP (VOIP) technology*
  • A manufacturer of wireless routers in a patent infringement suit in the ITC involving wireless communication patents*
  • A technology company in a patent infringement suit involving assertion of patents related to semiconductor manufacturing and wireless communications*
  • An inventor of medical implant technology in USPTO proceedings against a manufacturer of contraceptives*
  • Banks in a patent infringement suit pertaining to assertion of banking security patents in district court and USPTO proceedings*
  • A technology company in a patent infringement suit relating to digital asset protection and media streaming technologies in district court and USPTO proceedings*
  • A technology company in a patent infringement suit in district court and USPTO proceedings relating to memory management, GPU hardware, and 3D graphics processing*
  • A technology company in a patent infringement suit in district court relating to digital asset protection and media streaming technologies*

Other Matters

  • Drilling companies in a patent licensing dispute involving oil drilling technology*
  • An insurance company in a trademark infringement dispute against a car manufacturer*
  • A household appliance manufacturer in false advertising litigation relating to vacuum technology*
  • A major car manufacturer in product liability litigation in multidistrict litigation relating to ignition switch design*
  • A major offroad vehicle manufacturer in product liability litigation in multiple state courts relating to engine design*

*Matter handled prior to joining Latham

Bar Qualification

  • Illinois

Education

  • JD, University of Michigan Law School, 2012
  • BS in Computer Science, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 2005