Colin B. Heideman

Partner

Seattle

206-405-2000

colin.heideman@knobbe.com

Download vCard

Overview

Experience

Recognition

Resources

Colin is an experienced patent litigator who, for more than 17 years, has been winning cases for his clients in district courts around the country and at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board. Super Lawyers recognized Colin as a “Washington Rising Star” in 2015 and, since then, Colin has been recognized three times as a “Future Star” by the Benchmark Litigation Guide, received the 2019 award for “IP Litigation Law within Washington” by International Advisory Experts, was named to the shortlist for 2023 “Litigator of the Year – Washington State” by Managing IP, was named one of “The World's Leading Patent Professionals” for Litigation in the 2023 Patent 1000 guide by Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) magazine, and was selected by peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® (2024) for Intellectual Property Litigation.

Colin’s success in district court cases – from New York to California and from Washington to Texas – stems from his ability to focus large, complex litigation matters on key case-dispositive issues, and to develop the record necessary to win on those issues. This ability has served him equally well in inter partes review proceedings, where he has served as lead counsel in dozens of successful IPR proceedings and was recently recognized as a Top 50 Best Performing IPR attorney for Petitioners in Patexia’s PTAB Intelligence (2023) report. He has also successfully argued at the Federal Circuit.

Colin co-founded the Canadian American Bar Association and has served as its Vice President and as its Secretary-Treasurer. He is also an active member of the Washington State Patent Lawyers Association (WSPLA) and formerly served as the Chair of the WSPLA Litigation Committee. Away from the office, Colin serves as a volunteer coach for the Sno-King Amateur Hockey Association.

Education

Vanderbilt University Law School (J.D., 2005), Associate Editor, Vanderbilt Law Review

University of Alberta (B.S. Chemical Engineering, 2002), With Distinction

Vanderbilt University Law School

University of Alberta

State Bar of California

District of Columbia Bar

State Bar of Washington

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

U.S. District Court - Central District of California

U.S. District Court - Southern District of California

U.S. District Court - Western District of Washington

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Biotechnology

Chemical

Medical Devices & Procedures

Pharmaceuticals

Energy

Practice Areas

IP Strategy

Opinions & Counseling

Appellate Litigation

Hatch-Waxman Litigation

Medical Device Litigation

Trade Secret & Employment Mobility Litigation

Trademark & Brand Protection Litigation

PTAB IPR & Post-Grant Proceedings

Patent Office Litigation

Amazon.com, Inc. v. CustomPlay, LLC, IPR2018-01496, -01497, and -01498 (P.T.A.B.):

Serve as lead counsel for Amazon in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) on patents relating to displaying annotations during the playback of a video.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute et al. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 1:18-cv-00549-BKS-CFH (N.D.N.Y):

Represent Amazon in a patent infringement lawsuit filed in the Northern District of New York relating to natural language processing, and serve as lead counsel in the related IPR proceeding (IPR2019-01068).

ARTHREX, INC. v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC.

Represented Smith & Nephew in a patent infringement case in the District of Massachusetts, and several IPR proceedings, involving patents relating to patient-specific instruments for knee replacement surgery. After our team successfully obtained final written decisions invalidating the first four asserted patents and Mr. Heideman conducted oral argument in four additional IPR proceedings, the parties settled.

Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al., 1:13-cv-01608.

Represented Amazon in a patent infringement action in the District of Delaware on seven patents relating to personalized recommendations, internet check-out processes, decryption, online advertising, and operating system updates. Obtained judgment that all asserted patents were invalid for failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter. 2015 WL 4730906 (D. Del. Aug. 10, 2015). Also successfully represented Amazon in the subsequent appeal to the Federal Circuit. (Case No. 2015-2008.)

Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v. Personalized Media Communications, LLC.

Successfully represented Amazon in inter partes review proceedings involving all seven patents asserted in district court litigation. The PTAB held all of the challenged claims invalid as anticipated and/or obvious. See 2016 WL 932881; 2016 WL 1133371; 2016 WL 1170773; 2016 WL 1174571; 2016 WL 1224164; 2016 WL 1174550; 2016 WL 1296088. When PMC appealed the PTAB’s final written decision of invalidity, Mr. Heideman successfully argued to the Federal Circuit, obtaining a Rule 36 affirmance of the PTAB’s decision. (Fed. Cir. Case No. 2016-2606.)

Depomed, Inc. et al. v. Watson Labs.-Florida, Inc. et al., 1:12-cv-00492.

Represent defendants in a patent infringement action in the District of Delaware on multiple patents relating to controlled-release oral dosage forms comprising metformin hydrochloride (the active ingredient in Glumetza®). Obtained favorable case-dispositive settlement for client.

Anderson v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 2:12-cv-01979.

Represented defendant in a design patent infringement case in the Western District of Washington involving plaintiff’s design patent related to a disposable absorbent undergarment. Obtained early dismissal of plaintiff’s infringement claims and a declaration of noninfringement. 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188222 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 25, 2013). Also represented the defendant on appeal and obtained affirmance of the district court’s judgment. 570 Fed. Appx. 927; 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13016 (Fed. Cir. July 10, 2014).

Aegis Mobility, Inc. v. Katasi LLC and ObdEdge, LLC, 1:12-cv-03306.

Represented plaintiff in a declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration of noninfringement and invalidity in the District of Colorado. The technology at issue related to systems and methods for disabling mobile devices in vehicles to prevent distracted driving. Obtained a favorable case-dispositive covenant not to sue from defendants.

Jonna Markets, LLC v. Quickie Stores, Inc., 2:12-cv-92232.

Represented plaintiff in a trademark infringement lawsuit in the Western District of Washington involving defendant’s unauthorized use of the mark, “Plum Market.” Achieved a favorable case-dispositive settlement for client.

Lupin Atlantis Holdings S.A. v. Ranbaxy Labs. Ltd. et al., 2:11-cv-03851.

Represented defendants in a patent infringement action in the Southern District of New York on two patents relating to pharmaceutical compositions of fenofibrate (the active ingredient in Lupin’s Antara® product). Achieved favorable case-dispositive settlement for client.

Advanced Thermal Sciences Corp. v. Applied Materials, Inc., 8:07-cv-01384.

Represented plaintiff in a breach of contract and improper inventorship action in the Central District of California involving patents relating to thermal control of semiconductor manufacturing equipment. Obtained summary judgment on critical issues and, following a two-week bench trial, the Court ruled in favor of our client on all substantive issues. See 2010 WL 2015236 (C.D.Cal.). Following the bench trial, obtained $5.7 million in attorneys’ fees for our client.

Alltech, Inc. v. Cenzone Tech, Inc. and Jung Fu Wu 06-CV-0153 JM (RUB)

Represented plaintiff in a patent infringement action in the Southern District of California on a patent relating to compositions for binding mycotoxins in animal feed. After obtaining summary judgment of infringement and summary judgment on defendant’s antitrust and invalidity counterclaims, obtained favorable case-dispositive settlement for our client.

Awards & Honors

Patexia 2023

Recognized as a "Top 50 Best Performing IPR Attorney for representing Petitioners" in Patexia’s 2023 PTAB Intelligence Report
Selected by peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® for his work in Intellectual Property Litigation (2024)
Named one of "The World's Leading Patent Professionals" for Litigation in the Patent 1000 guide by Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) magazine (2023). In the 2023 guide, Colin was described as "an excellent and efficient case manager who offers practical legal advice. He is very responsive, detail oriented and provides great value.”
Recognized as a "Future Star" in the 2021, 2023 and 2024 editions of the Benchmark Litigation Guide
Received the 2019 Award for "IP Litigation Law within Washington" by International Advisory Experts
Named a 2015 "Washington Rising Star" in intellectual property law by Super Lawyers.

Speeches & Seminars

“2018: A Year of Change for Post Issuance Proceedings,” The IP Strategy Summit, Seattle, WA (May 2, 2018)

“Fighting the Ultimate Troll: A Case Study,” the LOTNetwork Bridge, San Francisco, CA (May 11, 2017)

“Enforcement & Litigation Strategies,” IP Enforcement: Seattle, Seattle, WA (November 8, 2017)

“Highlights from Halo v. Pulse – The New Standard for Enhanced Damages in Patent Cases,” The IP Strategy Summit, Seattle, WA (October 20, 2016)

“Exploiting the IPR Process for Better Business Outcomes,” The IP Strategy Summit, Seattle, WA (October 20, 2016).

“Getting the Most Out of Your Relationship with Outside Counsel,” IP Impact Seattle 2012: Innovative Intellectual Property Litigation Strategies. Seattle, WA (February 29, 2012).

“Offers to License: The Tip of the U.S. Patent Litigation Iceberg,” IP Impact Vancouver 2011: Strategies for Protecting Your IP in the US (January 20, 2011).