2175 North California Boulevard Suite 600, Walnut Creek, CA USA 94596
Mark Mathison has 15 years of experience arguing patent applications through the intellectual property offices of the world. He primarily concentrates his practice on counseling mid-size companies and university technology transfer offices, though he actively manages attorney teams for two Fortune 100 companies and several startups.
Recent electronics-related technologies he covered include medical implants, PCB antennas, microwave resonators for 5G, and Marx generators. Mechanical technologies include microfabricated cell scaffolding, endoscope tools, bioreactors, a biologics manufacturing center, YAG laser waveguides, and fire-resistant cables. Software technologies include on-the-fly video editing & sharing tools, digital twin optimizations, and computational linguistics supported by machine learning models. Above all, he treasures aeronautical or other inventions that relate to his pilot's license.
Mr. Mathison is intimately familiar with what it's like to go through the patent process—as the inventor of 7 patents on Kilpatrick Townsend's internal software tools and client extranet. Sometime this week he likely programmed in C#/ASP.NET, HTML/CSS, or JavaScript/jQuery in his spare time.
Last year (2022), legal industry magazine Law360 recognized Mr. Mathison for writing two of the most-read guest articles. One article encouraged Ukrainian patents before the invasion, and one covered how to handle Russian patents afterward. Among his other articles, he is most proud of the one titled "Where to Enter the PCT National Phase?"
He has spoken at Berkeley, Stanford, and for Strafford Publications. He presented at the Intellectual Property Owners (IPO) Association, both in the U.S. and Europe, and Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). And he deliberated software patents at the Global Indian Technology Professionals Assoc. World event in Silicon Valley.
Over the years, Mr. Mathison has obtained hundreds and hundreds of U.S. and foreign patents for clients of Kilpatrick Townsend, one of the largest IP-focused law firms in the world. He wrote freedom to operate, noninfringement, and invalidity opinions and advised on infringement and due diligence. To this day, he trains and manages teams of patent practitioners, from fellow partners to patent agents.
Experience
Before entering the field of law, Mr. Mathison worked nine years as an aeronautical engineer at Raytheon Missile Systems in Massachusetts, Arizona, and California. As a young engineer, he designed and built test equipment, flew captive flight test sorties, and programmed telemetry analysis tools. He capped off his engineering career heading a laboratory on a multi-million dollar military project in San Diego.
Mr. Mathison is a registered Professional Engineer (P.E.) in Electrical Engineering.
Insights View All
University of California at Los Angeles J.D. (2007)
University of Washington M.S. (1995) Aeronautical Engineering
Harvey Mudd College B.S. (1994) Engineering, Dean's List
California (2007)
Washington (2008)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Courts for all Districts of California
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2005)
Disclaimer
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.
