J. Warren Lytle, Jr. Partner

Jay Lytle practices in all areas of patent law with an emphasis on patent litigation, counseling clients on intellectual property matters, preparing and prosecuting patents, and opinion work.  Jay has experience litigating patent issues in various U.S. district courts and the International Trade Commission (ITC).  He also has considerable experience writing and prosecuting patent applications in the electrical and mechanical arts, particularly with computer hardware, software, network, and telecommunications technologies.  In his practice he also advises clients on establishing, building and maintaining U.S. and foreign patent portfolios, analyzing patent portfolios and licensing patents.

Maryland, District of Columbia
Supreme Court of the United States
U.S. Court of Appeals - Federal Circuit
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

American University, Washington College of Law (J.D. magna cum laude 1996)
University of Maryland, College Park (M.S. Electrical Engineering/Computers, 1990)
University of Maryland, College Park (B.S. Electrical Engineering, 1982)

Computer architecture; microprocessors; video/audio compression (MPEG); navigation/GPS systems; laser eye surgery; semiconductor memories; computer software; computer storage and retrieval systems; content management systems; database management systems; network technologies; telecom.; mobile telephone systems; wireless and spread spectrum comm. systems; digital copiers and imaging systems; social networking technology; electrical power generation - green technologies, including wind power generation; hearing aids.

IBM Corporation - Prior to working as a patent attorney and patent agent, Mr. Lytle worked at IBM for over ten years as an Advisory Engineer and Programmer.  He worked on large scale development projects including a commercial image management product, airline reservation systems, and development and deployment of the Global Positioning System (GPS) Control Segment.

Mr. Lytle also was a founding partner in another Washington D.C. area patent law firm.

ETG, Inc. v. Sonic Innovations, Inc., et. al. (D. Del. 2005) representing Widex

Digital Equip. Corp. v. Intel Corp., (D. Mass), represented Intel

In the Matter of Certain Excimer Laser Systems For Vision Correction Surgery, ITC, represented Nidek

NEC Corp. v. Harris Corp. (N.D. Cal.), represented NEC

NEC Corp. v. Hyundai Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. (E.D. Va.), represented NEC

Ortho-McNeil Pharm., Inc. and Daiichi Pharm. Co. v. Mylan Labs., Inc. et al., (N.D.W.V.), represented Daiichi

Ortho-McNeil Pharm., Inc. and Daiichi Pharm. Co. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., et al. (D. N.J.), represented Daiichi

Visual Networks Operations, Inc. v. Paradyne Corp., (D. Md.), represented Visual Networks

VISX v. Nidek, (N.D. Cal.), represented Nidek

Associations
AIPLA
ABA IP Section