Following the previous analysis of top PTAB law firms, this week we turn our attention to the individuals who are directly involved in the outcomes before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. While law firms provide the institutional expertise and resources required for complex patent disputes, the success of PTAB proceedings often depends on the attorneys leading the strategy, drafting petitions, and arguing cases before the Board. Experience in PTAB procedures, understanding panel dynamics, and managing parallel litigation strategies can significantly influence the outcome of a case.

In this week’s insight, we analyze PTAB attorneys based on both activity and performance indicators, identifying practitioners who consistently appear in proceedings and deliver strong results for their clients. The rankings highlight attorneys who have played a meaningful role in PTAB practice during the five-year period covered in our latest PTAB Intelligence Report.

PTAB Outcomes Across Terminated Proceedings

In our previous insight, we analyzed the yearly volume of PTAB petitions, highlighting how filing activity has changed in recent years. However, filings alone do not fully capture the dynamics of PTAB practice. Equally important is understanding how these proceedings ultimately conclude, since outcomes provide meaningful signals about litigation strategies, settlement behavior, and the effectiveness of challenges.

The PTAB Intelligence Report, therefore, also analyzes terminated proceedings across the study period. The distribution of outcomes provides a clearer picture of how disputes progress once a petition is filed and whether they are resolved through adjudication or other mechanisms.

As shown in the chart above, PTAB proceedings most commonly conclude in one of three ways: final written decisions, denials, or settlements.

● Settlements account for the largest share, representing 33.0% of terminated cases.
● Final Written Decisions (FWD) were issued in 32.1% of cases, reflecting the portion of disputes that proceed through the full PTAB trial process.
● Denials account for 30.7%, highlighting the importance of the institution stage as a major gatekeeping step in PTAB proceedings.
● A smaller percentage of cases ended through procedural terminations (2.9%) or adverse judgments (1.4%), which typically arise from procedural developments or strategic withdrawals.

Top PTAB Attorneys by Activity and Performance

Although many PTAB proceedings involve large legal teams, a relatively small number of attorneys typically lead the key strategic decisions in each case. These attorneys draft petitions and responses, define arguments during the institution and trial phases, and coordinate closely with parallel district court litigation when applicable. For companies selecting counsel or assessing litigation risk, understanding which attorneys regularly appear in PTAB cases can provide valuable insight into experience levels and strategic capabilities.

The table below highlights a selection of leading PTAB attorneys based on a combination of activity and performance metrics, representing work on the patent owner side, the petitioner side, or both. These attorneys handle a significant share of PTAB proceedings while maintaining strong results across multiple stages of a case. Being ranked within the top 250 places an attorney among approximately the top 4% of the 5,650 attorneys who participated in PTAB proceedings during the study period, which spans from July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2025.

Attorney	Law Firm	All Cases	Patent Owner Cases	Petitioner Cases	Rank	Category
Eliot D. Williams	Baker Botts LLP	164	44	120	1	Petitioner Performance Rank
Eagle H. Robinson	Norton Rose Fulbright	84	29	55	1	Overall Performance Rank
Nathan Lowenstein	Lowenstein & Weatherwax	100	100	0	1	PO Performance Rank
Andrew S. Ehmke	Haynes and Boone, LLP	69	0	69	2	Petitioner Performance Rank
Naveen Modi	Paul Hastings	237	29	208	2	Petitioner Activity Rank
James M. Glass	Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan	222	69	153	4	Petitioner Activity Rank
Michael F. Heim	Heim, Payne & Chorush LLP	63	63	0	4	PO Performance Rank
William A. Meunier	Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.	53	51	2	6	PO Performance Rank
Adam P. Seitz	Erise IP	133	4	129	7	Petitioner Activity Rank
Scott A. McKeown	Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks	178	45	133	9	Petitioner Activity Rank
Richard M. Bemben	Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox	99	94	5	12	PO Performance Rank
James M. Heintz	DLA Piper	72	5	67	12	Petitioner Performance Rank
Scott W Hejny	McKool Smith	140	115	25	13	PO Activity Rank
Heath J. Briggs	Greenberg Traurig LLP	93	26	67	13	Petitioner Performance Rank
James T. Wilson	Bunsow De Mory	54	53	1	18	Overall Performance Rank
Douglas R. Wilson	Armond Wilson LLP	37	19	18	21	Overall Performance Rank
Christopher T. L. Douglas	Alston & Bird	123	45	78	21	Overall Activity Rank
Andrew S. Baluch	Smith Baluch	31	6	25	33	Overall Performance Rank
David L. Alberti	Kramer Alberti Lim & Tonkovich LLP	78	77	1	36	PO Activity Rank
David J. Tobin	McDermott Will & Emery	34	2	32	40	Petitioner Performance Rank
Hamad M. Hamad	Caldwell Cassady & Curry	43	43	0	46	PO Performance Rank
Stephen D. Zinda	Cabello Hall Zinda	50	43	7	48	PO Performance Rank
Clement J. Naples	Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton	33	24	9	53	PO Performance Rank
R. Parrish Freeman	Maschoff Brennan Gilmore Israelsen & Mauriel LLP	28	24	4	131	PO Performance Rank
Bradford A. Cangro	PV Law LLP	53	26	27	191	Overall Activity Rank
James D. Stein	Lee & Hayes	23	12	11	253	PO Performance Rank

Methodology Overview

To identify leading PTAB attorneys, we analyzed proceedings filed between July 1, 2020 and June 30, 2025, focusing on attorneys who participated in Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), Covered Business Method (CBM), and Derivation proceedings.

The rankings consider a combination of factors, including:
● Total number of PTAB proceedings handled
● Case outcomes
● Consistency of activity over time

This approach provides a more complete picture of PTAB influence compared to rankings based solely on case volume. For a detailed explanation of our methodology, including ranking criteria, performance factors, and normalization techniques, visit our online methodology guide.

About the PTAB Intelligence Report

For companies in patent disputes, attorney-level data can be an important component of strategic planning. Understanding which practitioners are most active at the PTAB can help organizations identify experienced counsel and better evaluate representation options.

Law firms and individual practitioners also use this data to benchmark their activity and performance against peers, identify areas for growth, and better understand evolving trends in PTAB practice.

These rankings represent just one portion of the insights included in Patexia’s PTAB Intelligence Report, which provides detailed statistics and benchmarking across companies, law firms, and attorneys involved in PTAB proceedings.

👉 To explore the full rankings and analysis, access the complete PTAB Intelligence Report.