Overview
Jeremiah S. Helm co-chairs Knobbe Martens’ appellate practice group. Jeremiah has represented clients in a variety of technological fields, with an emphasis on patent litigation and appellate practice. Jeremiah has appeared before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in over seventy cases, and routinely presents oral argument before the Court.
Before joining the firm, Jeremiah worked as an Associate Solicitor at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. In that role, Jeremiah represented the Director in both district and appellate courts, and provided legal advice about intellectual property law policy and regulation.
Clerk Experience
Law Clerk for the Honorable Judge Kimberly A. Moore, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (2010-2012).
Admitted to practice only in California. Practice outside of California is limited to matters and proceedings before federal courts and agencies.
Education
- University of Michigan Law School (J.D., 2007), magna cum laude, Order of the Coif
- Princeton University (Ph.D. Chemistry, 2004)
- Rice University (B.A. Chemistry & Art History, 1998)
Representative Matters
Alcon Inc. et al v. Padagis Israel Pharmaceuticals Ltd. et al, 22-cv-01422-WCB (D. Del.) (2025)
Represented Padagis in Hatch-Waxman litigation in the District of Delaware concerning patents related to Simbrinza® (a glaucoma treatment). After a three-day bench trial, U.S. Circuit Judge William C. Bryson, sitting by designation, found that Padagis’s product did not infringe the remaining patent-in-suit. Alcon had originally asserted two patents, but stipulated to non-infringement of the second patent after summary judgement was granted in favor of Padagis on multiple issues. This trial court decision in Padagis’s favor allows the company to provide patients in the U.S. with a more cost-effective treatment option.
Recognition
Awards & Honors
- Recognized by The Legal 500 “United States” for Patent Litigation (2024)
- Recognized in Patexia’s 2023 PTAB Intelligence Report as a “Top Performer” based on activity and performance before the PTAB
- Recognized by The Legal 500 “United States” for Patent Litigation (2022)
Affiliations
Recognized by The Legal 500 “United States” for Patent Litigation (2022)
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Advisory Council (2024-present)
News & Insights
Articles
Fed. Circ. In March: Forfeiting Claim Construction On Appeal, Law360, April 22, 2025.
Fed. Circ. In Feb.: Lessons On Cases With Many Patent Claims, Law360, March 25, 2025.
The Fed. Circ. In 2024: 5 Major Rulings To Know, Law360, January 21, 2025.
Fed. Circ. In December: A Patent Prosecution History Lesson, Law360, January 2, 2025.
The Fed. Circ. In October: Aetna And License-Term Review, Law360, November 5, 2024.
The Fed. Circ. In August: Secret Sales And Public Disclosures, Law360, September 9, 2024.
The Fed. Circ. In June: More Liability For Generic-Drug Makers, Law360, August 2, 2024.
The Fed. Circ. In May: A Major Shift In Design Patent Law, Law360, June 28, 2024.
The Fed. Circ. In May: The Printed Matter Doctrine’s Scope, Law360, May 30, 2024.
The Fed. Circ. In April: Hurdles Remain For Generics, Law360, May 3, 2024.
The Fed. Circ. In February: A Reminder On Procedure Rule 28, Law360, March 28, 2024.
Fed. Circ. In Feb.: Using Prior Products To Invalidate A Patent, Law360, February 29, 2024.
Fed. Circ. In Jan.: One Word Can Affect Claim Construction, Law360, January 31, 2024.
Medtronic’s Cautionary Tale Of Fed. Circ. Word Limits, Law360, January 9, 2024.
The Fed. Circ. In Nov.: Factual Support And Appellate Standing, Law360, November 30, 2023.
Fed. Circ. Elekta Holding May Make Patent Prosecution Harder, Law360, November 1, 2023.
Litigation Blog
- Raise It or Lose It! The Federal Circuit Will Not Address Obviousness Arguments First Raised by the PTO on Appeal
- The Choice Is Not Yours: Foreign Defendants Cannot Avoid Personal Jurisdiction by Post-suit, Unilateral Forum Designation
- Seeing Clearly: An Ordinary Observer Must Look Through Lens of the Prior Art
- Lack of Advance Notice Vacates District Court’s Orders
- Vacated Vacatur Terminates Termination
- Section 101 Jurisprudence Still Sound Post-Dobbs
- Silence Is No Support for Negative Claim Limitation
- Somebody’s Wrong: PTAB Must Resolve Conflicting Factual Testimony During IPR
- Sounding Off: Prosecution Disclaimer Requires Unambiguous Intrinsic Evidence
- Generic mark lacked sufficient stylization to serve as a source identifier
- “All the Expenses” Does Not Mean All: PTO Denied Its Expert Witness Fees
- District Court’s Pleading Standard Returns an Error Code in PS4 Battle
- A Standalone Obviousness Reference Must Be Enabling to Invalidate
- Reviewability of PTAB Estoppel Decisions
- Federal Circuit Throws Out Diaper Genie Decision
- Controlling Your Own Destiny: Patent Owner Unilaterally Moots Appeal to Preserve Favorable PTAB Determination
- Proprietary Rights in a Mark Not Required for Standing at the TTAB
- Standing to Appeal in IPR Remains Even After Divesting Accused Products
- Avoiding Ineligibility by Claiming a Specific Implementation That Improves upon the Prior Art
- Federal Circuit Clarifies Scope of On-Sale Bar