Joseph A. Farco

PartnerLocke LordConnectContact

Joseph A. Farco is a partner in the Firm's intellectual property law group, and specializes in litigation and transactions involving patents and trade secrets.

As a trial patent lawyer, Joe represents patent owners, including inventors, and foreign and domestic companies in district court and the International Trade Commission. In this capacity, Joe handles pre-filing due diligence for patent owners on how to best assert their patents, handling cease-and-desist correspondence to avoid litigation, drafting complaints, answers, 12(b) motions, discovery and discovery motions, spearheading electronic discovery and strategies for electronically searchable information (ESI), taking and defending fact, expert, and 30(b)(6) depositions, handling all aspects of Markman proceedings and oral arguments related to same, summary judgement briefs and oral arguments related to same, pre- and post-trial memoranda and oral arguments related to same, technical and damages expert preparation and discovery, accounting and costs motions, appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, petitions for certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States. As trial counsel, Joe makes advanced preparation and efficient strategy development a priority, especially for witnesses who are not native English speakers and where numerous experts are involved. Joe has prepared foreign and domestic witnesses for trial as well as experts.

As a registered patent attorney, Joe practices before the United States Patent and Trademark Office where he counsels clients from all over the world under America Invents Act (AIA) and pre-AIA rules to obtain patent protection in the form of utility and design patents. Joe has argued for his clients to obtain patents on their inventions through appeals to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). He also has been involved in challenges to patent rights under ex parte reexaminations and inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, including preparing and arguing the same. In this capacity, Joe also uses his litigation and prosecution experience to provide opinions for clients (e.g., patentability, non-infringement, and invalidity), to assist clients in making well-informed intellectual property decisions for their business or for helping avoid allegations of induced infringement and/or willful infringement of patents.

Joe’s engineering and science background allows him to help clients in a diverse array of technology areas, including medical devices, prosthetics, commercial electronic and mechanical products, websites, digital cameras, furniture, home appliances, wireless and other remote-access communication systems, insurance and other business method algorithms, internal combustion engines, turbo machinery, pet food products, oils and resins, and chemical products and formulations.

Prior to his legal career, Joe was a project engineer for Hamilton Sundstrand Space Systems where he led a team of engineers to develop mechanical, electrical, and materials test analyses for the life-critical Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) worn by astronauts on space missions to and from the International Space Station.

Representative Experience

  • Represented Canadian manufacturer of appliances in avoiding patent litigation over client’s cleaning devices during cease and desist discussions.
  • Represented printing supplies manufacturer in litigation related to toner bottle products.
  • Represented technology start-up by responding to cease and desist allegations of patent infringement of website code.
  • Represented beverage manufacturer in alleged design patent infringement matter to obtain settlement.
  • Obtained settlement for client in ITC investigation involving film and video motion-picture lighting devices.
  • Represented recreational product manufacturer in district court and in ITC against allegations of patent infringement by client’s two-stroke engine technologies and obtaining Markman rulings resulting in summary judgment of non-infringement.
  • Obtained summary judgment of invalidity for medical device company against patent directed to blood clotting graft products based on patentee failing to properly claim § 120 priority to earlier application, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
  • Obtained summary judgment of patent non-infringement for medical device company against patent to stent grafts based on construction of term placed into asserted claims due to specification and prosecution disclaimer, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
  • Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement for automobile manufacturer against patent directed to dual injection technology.
  • Obtained cancellation of allegedly infringed patent claims directed to HVAC motors for client manufacturer via inter partes review in the PTAB.
  • Obtained cancellation of allegedly infringed patent claims directed to catalytic converter technologies for automobile manufacturer via inter partes review in the PTAB.
  • Co-author of amicus brief on appropriate standard of review for extrinsic evidence findings during district court Markman hearings related to patents on ground-fault interruptor technologies.
  • Obtained settlement and denial of preliminary injunction against client in alleged missapropriation of trade secrets related to antiballistic fabric technologies.