Skip to content
IP + Technology Law
Lindsay Laddaran - Associate - Orange County

Lindsay Laddaran

Associate
Orange County
[email protected]
949-760-0404
vcard iconDownload vCard

Overview

Lindsay Laddaran is an associate in our Orange County office.

Lindsay practices intellectual property law with an emphasis on U.S. and foreign patent portfolio management, patent prosecution, and due diligence in the medical device practice area. She currently represents clients in medical device technologies, including wound care, ophthalmic, orthopedics, dental, cardiovascular, respiratory, and robotic fields. Lindsay also represents clients in a variety of other fields, such as housewares, consumer goods, and other mechanical industries.

Lindsay is known for her hard work and enthusiasm, even when facing new challenges. Her dedication to her clients’ needs leads to more valuable IP strategies.

Lindsay earned her J.D. at Georgetown University Law Center, where she served as an executive editor of the Food and Drug Law Journal. She received her B.S. degree in Biomedical Engineering at Washington University in St. Louis.

Lindsay worked as a summer associate in 2016 and joined the firm in 2017.

Education

  • Georgetown University Law Center (J.D., 2017)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (B.S. Biomedical Engineering, 2014)

Bar Admissions

  • State Bar of California

News & Insights

Articles

Latest Updates and News

Blog - Litigation
Sep 2020
Federal Circuit Has Jurisdiction to Review Joinder Decisions in IPRs
FACEBOOK, INC., V. WINDY CITY INNOVATIONS LLC Before Prost, Plager, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Federal Circuit has jurisdiction to review challenges to the Board's joinder decision in an instituted IPR. An IPR petitioner may not join itself to an earlier IPR in which it was already a party, and may not add new claims or issues to the earlier IPR through such joinder.
Blog - Litigation
Jul 2020
A Mark Styled “Generic.Com” May Be Trademark Eligible
USPTO v. BOOKING.COM Before the Supreme Court of the United States. On Writ of Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Summary: A term styled "generic.com" is not necessarily generic and can be eligible for federal trademark protection if consumers view the mark as distinguishing the source of the goods.
Blog - Litigation
Apr 2020
No Waiver of Patent Eligibility Challenge Under § 101
ERICSSON INC. v. TCL COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY Before Prost, Newman, and Chen. Appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: The issue of patent eligibility under § 101 may be preserved for appeal even if not raised for decision or mentioned in the district court’s final judgment if there is an "effective grant of summary judgment" in favor of the non-moving party.
Blog - Litigation
Jan 2020
Integration Clause Does Not Necessarily Extinguish Prior Agreement on Same Patent
MOLON MOTOR AND COIL CORP. v. NIDEC MOTOR CORPORATION Before Lourie, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Summary: In interpreting an integration clause that nullifies all prior agreements on the same subject matter, the court will look at factors such as type of license, scope of market, number of patents, and types of products, to determine what is the same subject matter.
Blog - Litigation
Sep 2019
Federal Circuit Applies Collateral Estoppel and Avoids Antitrust Issues
INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC v. CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORP. Before Prost, Bryson, and Reyna.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Summary: The Federal Circuit applied collateral estoppel and thus avoided deciding whether a party with a large patent portfolio that allegedly threatened serial litigation to obtain licensing fees may have violated antitrust laws.    
Blog - Litigation
Jul 2019
Federal Circuit Holds Adequate Notice of PTAB’s Claim Construction Provided Through Oral Hearing
TQ Delta LLC v. Dish Network LLC Before: Newman, Linn, and Wallach. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The rights of parties in an IPR are not violated when the PTAB provides adequate notice of the PTAB’s understanding of the claim construction during the oral hearing. Dish Network ("Dish") petitioned for inter partes review of a patent owned by TQ Delta, LLC ("TQ Delta") which describes a method to manage the power of a transceiver in sleep mode and to wake up the transceiver from sleep mode. The PTAB found the claims were obvious.