Michael C. Gilchrist – Of Counsel

Practicing since 1995, Mike worked both within private practice and as in-house counsel at a Fortune 500 financial company before joining MVS in 2009. Mike’s practice focuses primarily on protecting his clients’ mechanical and financial service innovations by writing reader-friendly patent applications, shepherding those applications through the Patent Office, and maximizing the value of issued patents through enforcement, licensing, and sales.

Mike also participates in appeals and trials at the United States Patent and Trademark Office including Covered Business Method Review, Supplemental Examination, Ex Parte and Inter Partes Reexamination, and Trademark Oppositions and Cancellations. Mike recently successfully appealed the Patent Office’s rejection of claims in a utility patent application that resulted in a precedential decision by the Federal Circuit vacating the rejection. In re Durance, 891 F.3d 991 (Fed. Cir. 2018). This is one of only four such results at the Federal Circuit since 2016.

Mike is a past president of the Iowa Intellectual Property Law Association and a chair of the Intellectual Property Section of the Iowa State Bar Association. Mike coaches the Drake University Law School Intellectual Property Moot Court Team.

  • Design Patents
  • Licensing
  • Litigation
  • Mechanical Patents
  • Software & Business Methods Patents
  • Trade Secrets
  • Trademarks
  • Agritech
  • Construction and Infrastructure
  • Consumer Products and Technology
  • Financial Technology

Professional Associations

Iowa Bar Association

American Intellectual Property Law Association

American Bar Association

Education

University of Iowa College of Law, J.D., with high distinction, 1995

University of Iowa, B.S., Mechanical Engineering, 1991

Bar & Court Admissions

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office – 1997

Iowa State Bar – 1995

Supreme Court to Decide Whether “Secret Sales” are Prior Art

Prior art is any publication or activity that can be cited to find a claimed invention invalid as not new or as a merely obvious combination of existing elements. Until recently, the law had been settled that any sale (within the United States) of a product that included claimed features of an invention is prior […]

Read Post →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up