Troy Petersen is a registered patent attorney who focuses his practice on patent procurement, client counseling, and intellectual property litigation primarily in the chemical and life sciences industries. Mr. Petersen has experience drafting and prosecuting domestic and international patent applications, including patent office appeals and post-grant proceedings. He is also experienced in preparing non-infringement, validity, patentability, and freedom-to-operate analyses in the chemical, polymer, medical device and pharmaceutical arts from both due diligence and litigation perspectives. Additionally, Mr. Petersen has experience in patent and trade secret litigation having participated in all phases of litigation including discovery, trial, and appeals.
Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Petersen worked as an attorney in the Virginia office of an intellectual property law firm where his areas of practice included patent drafting and prosecution, opinions and client counseling, and patent office proceedings. Previously, Mr. Petersen was an associate in the Washington, D.C. office of an international intellectual property law firm where he practiced all aspects of patent law, including patent and trade secret litigation, and patent procurement. Prior to launching his legal career, Mr. Petersen was employed at the hydrocarbons plant of a major chemical company, and at a drug delivery company.
Mr. Petersen conducted research in polymer synthesis, polymer processing and rheology in the lab of Dr. Chris Macosko at the University of Minnesota. While attending law school, he served on the editorial board of the Duke Law Journal, as a staff writer for the Duke Law and Technology Review, on the board of directors of the Duke Law Intellectual Property and Cyberlaw Society, and as an intellectual property research assistant for Professor Jerome Reichman. Mr. Petersen also spent a semester studying international law and intellectual property at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium.
Counsel for patentee Celanese in five inter partes review petitions filed by competitor Daicel challenging validity of Celanese patents related to industrial acetic acid production. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board initially ruled in favor of client Celanese, completely denying all five petitions, although requests for rehearing subsequently resulted in the institution of 3 of the 5 IPRs. In June of 2016, the PTAB issued final written decisions in the three IPRs, finding for patent owner Celanese and affirming all instituted claims as not unpatentable. United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Case Numbers IPR2014-01514, IPR2014-01515, IPR2015-000170, IPR2015-00171 and IPR2015-00173.
Insights View All
Duke University School of Law J.D. (2004) cum laude, Order of the Coif
University of Minnesota B. of Chemical Engineering (2001) high distinction
University of Minnesota B.S. (2001) Chemistry, high distinction
District of Columbia (2005)
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2005)
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.