Specializes in contested matters involving patents and trademarks. Mr. Ball has a proven track record of success in federal district and appeals courts throughout the U.S. as well as at the PTAB. He has also prepared hundreds of patent applications in technologies such as computer/Internet, electronics, robotics, materials, medical devices, food services, biotech/pharma, power generation, green technology, and consumer products. Mr. Ball’s trademark practice includes a vast array of trademark enforcement and anti-counterfeiting policing for brand owners in various industries, including fashion, software, biotech, and consumer products. He has extensive experience with licensing issues, IP due-diligence for mergers and acquisitions, defending against notice letters, and non-infringement and invalidity opinions.

Mr. Ball previously practiced at a large Boston law firm. He also worked as a software designer/developer for one of the first Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) providers.


Inventor U.S. Patent No. 10,521,838
Inventor U.S. Patent No. 9,195,677
Inventor U.S. Patent No. 8,805,922
Inventor U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2020/0126139
Inventor U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2016/0041748
Inventor U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2014/0324622
Inventor U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0297325
Inventor U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2011/0282928


J.D. Vermont Law School 2007
IPSI, Franklin Pierce Law Center 2006
B.S. University of Vermont, Computer Science 2000


Merit Scholar and Academic Excellence Award, Vermont Law School
Upsilon Pi Upsilon, International Honor Society for the Computing and Information Disciplines

Court Admissions

States of Connecticut and New York
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
U.S. District Court (Connecticut and others)
U.S. Court of Appeal (Federal Circuit and others)
U.S. Supreme Court


Vermont Law School


Making Sure A Noninfringement Opinion Is Effective, Law360, March 14, 2018
Using Ex Parte Patent Appeals To Advance Prosecution, Law360, March 15, 2016
Protecting your Trademark from Counterfeiting, General Counsel News, November 2015
Covered Business Method Review, Intellectual Property Magazine, May 2015
New Testimony Evidence In IPR, CBM — Proceed With Caution,, 2015
The Financial Impact Of Issues In M&A, Corporate Counsel, 2014
Implementing Patent Marking Strategies After AIA,, 2012
Design Protection For Apparel: Know Your Options, Apparel January 8, 2010
Ongoing IP Due Diligence, Business Law Today, vol. 19, Num. 2 Nov/Dec 2009
Export Control Laws,, May 19, 2009
Green Tech, The Stimulus Package and IP Protection, Mass High TEch, vol. 27, issue 16, p.14, April, 17, 2009
Outsourcing Your Intellectual Property Work May Be Illegal,, December 19, 2008
Intangible Business Assets: Value In Unregistered IP, ABA Science and Technology Quarterly Newsletter, vol. 1, issue 2, Oct 2008
Achieving Patent Protection For Software Inventions, The Computer & Internet Lawyer, vol. 25, No. 8, Aug 2008
Beware Of Export Control Laws, MAss Bar Assoc. YLD Journal, Summer 2008
Challenges With Patenting Software, Vermont Bar Journal, Winter 2007/2008


Patent Strategies, client presentation 2019
IP Due Diligence Strategy For M&A, client presentation 2014

Blog Posts

Efficient Patent Litigation Through Smart Claim Construction Strategies, September 1, 2020
The Patent Eligibility Fix Is Coming: Now Is The Time To Get Essential Protection On Software Inventions, April 29, 2020
Collecting Foreign Judgments Against US Entities, April 14, 2020
Continuation Applications Should be Part of Your Patent Strategy, September 25, 2019
What If a Trademark Becomes a Verb, July 23, 2019
When the Statue of Liberty Meets Intellectual Property Law, July 3, 2019
Patents: A Way to Attack, Defend, and Diplomacy, June 27, 2019
New Patentable Subject Matter Guidelines: Finally Some Help for Computer-Implemented Inventions, January 23, 2019
Case Dismissed: How Pleading May Affect 101 Analysis, November 20, 2018
Making Provisional Applications Part of Your IP Strategy, August 2, 2018
Why Examiners Like RCEs (and why you shouldn’t), February 12, 2018
District Court Illustrates How Specification Can Help or Hurt Patent Eligibility, September 11, 2017
PTAB Reverses 101 Rejection for Internet Technology, May 19, 2017
The Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Does Not Mean Broadest Possible Interpretation, February 28, 2017

© Copyright 2020 Whitmyer IP Group