Ben grew up on a poultry farm where he started working with machines at a young age. This exposure quickly sprouted into an interest in how things worked and overtime matured into an interest in innovation. New technology excites him. Ben’s favorite conversations happen when people discuss things they care deeply about – like their innovations. He loves to dig in and understand as much as he can. These intriguing conversations, and the opportunity to assist innovators with achieving their business goals are two things Ben loves about being an intellectual property associate at Knobbe Martens.
Ben earned his J.D. at Columbia Law School in New York where he was a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar. During law school Ben researched legal issues related to blockchain technologies with the Blockchain Project at Cardozo Law School. Ben later authored a paper related to cryptocurrencies for the Columbia Science and Technology Law Review.
Prior to law school Ben received his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Carleton University in Ontario, Canada. His studies included topics such as mechanics of solids, fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, heat transfer, engineering materials, nuclear engineering, and cost minimization algorithms. After his master’s Ben worked as an independent mechanical designer.
Benjamin Van Adrichem is an associate in the Orange County office and focuses on patent practice. Ben worked as a summer associate at Knobbe Martens in 2018 and joined the firm in 2019.
“Howey Should Be Distributing Cryptocurrencies; Applying the Howey Test to Mining, Airdropping, Forking and Initial Coin Offerings” Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, 2018-2019 volume.
- Federal Circuit Cannot Review Denial of Institution of IPR, Unless Extraordinary Circumstances Are Shown
- Evidence Supports Prior Art’s Public Accessibility but Not the Board’s Adoption of an Unpresented Theory of Anticipation
- Constitutional Issues Arising From PTAB Decisions Must Be Appealed to the Federal Circuit
- Courts Have No Jurisdiction Over Challenge to PTO Action Before Final Agency Decision
- An Inference That Compounds With Common Properties Share Other Related Properties Should Not Be Rejected as a Matter of Law at Summary Judgement