Andrew Turner is a skilled patent attorney who focuses on post-grant proceedings and patent prosecution and has worked with a variety of clients in diverse technical fields including audio and lighting systems, exercise equipment , and autonomous and electrified vehicle systems.
Andrew is a registered patent attorney, with degrees in both electrical and mechanical engineering, and focuses his practice on patent prosecution and post-grant proceedings. He co-chairs Brook’s post-grant proceedings practice group and has worked on over 50 IPR proceedings representing petitioners and patent owners. Andrew also has experience with reexaminations, reissues, and appeals to the Federal Circuit.
His practice also includes intellectual portfolio management and opinion preparation. Andrew has extensive experience with autonomous and electrified vehicle systems, LED lighting systems, audio systems, electric machines, controls, electronics, and exercise equipment.
Andrew has worked with clients of various sizes, from individual entrepreneurs to Fortune 500 companies. He particularly enjoys working with innovative people in different sectors and helping clients solve complex issues. He excels at developing strategies for prosecuting patent applications and challenging/defending patents.
Prior to his legal career, Andrew was an engineer in the automotive industry. He worked on the development of several electro-mechanical systems including adjustable pedals, brake systems, and battery charging systems. Andrew utilizes his engineering industry experience to counsel clients in view of their business concerns and to communicate with inventors and patent examiners on technical issues.
Representative Matters
Ford Motor Company v. AutoConnect Holdings LLC, (PTAB): Representing Ford (Petitioner) in seven IPRs challenging patents related to infotainment systems. Representative Case Nos.: IPR2025-01342; IPR2025-01383; and IPR2025-01524.
LifeCORE LLC d/b/a Assault Fitness v. Woodway USA, Inc., (PTAB): Represented LifeCORE (Petitioner) in four inter partes review (IPR) proceedings challenging patent claims across four patents related to manual treadmills, resulting in 78% of challenged claims being found unpatentable. Representative Case Nos. IPR2023-00836, IPR2023-00843, IPR2023-00849, and IPR2024-00083.
Volkswagen Group of America et al. v. Yechezkal Evan Spero, (PTAB): Defending Spero (Patent Owner) in 20+ IPRs repeatedly challenging patent claims across three patents related to adaptive lighting systems. Representative Case Nos.: IPR2022-01586, IPR2023-00315, and IPR2023-00335.
Apple Inc. v. Omni MedSci. Inc., (PTAB): Defended Omni (Patent Owner) in multiple inter partes review (IPR) proceedings challenging patent claims related to wearable devices that monitor physiological parameters, three of which were denied institution. Representative Case Nos.: IPR2019-00913, IPR2019-00910, and IPR2019-00911.
IEE Sensing, Inc. v. Delphi Technologies, Inc., (PTAB): Represented IEE (Petitioner) in an IPR challenging patent claims related to vehicle occupant detection systems, resulting in all claims being found unpatentable. Patent Owner filed a contingent motion to amend during the IPR, and the PTAB found all the substitute claims unpatentable as well. IPR2018-00179. We also filed a third-party protest challenging Patent Owner’s subsequent reissue application no. 16/518,486 and Patent Owner let the application go abandoned.
Google LLC v. Seven Networks, LLC, (PTAB): Defended Seven (Patent Owner) in multiple IPRs challenging patent claims related to telecommunications, resulting in a favorable outcome for the client. Representative Case No. IPR2018-01115
Ford Motor Company v. Paice LLC, (PTAB): Represented Ford (Petitioner) in 22 IPRs challenging many claims across five separate patents related to hybrid vehicles, resulting in hundreds of claims being found unpatentable. Representative Case Nos.: IPR2014-00570, IPR2014-00875, IPR2014-01415, IPR2015-00785, IPR2015-00801
Paice LLC v. Ford Motor Company, (Fed. Cir. 2016-2018): Successfully represented Ford in numerous appeals challenging the PTAB decisions that had found hundreds of patent claims unpatentable. Representative Case Nos.: 2016-1411, 2016-1647, 2017-1387
In re Certain Hybrid Electric Vehicles, (ITC): Trial counsel for Ford in multi-patent investigation directed to hybrid electric vehicles. Settlement after trial. Inv. No. 337-TA-1042
Education
J.D., Wayne State University
B.S., Electrical Engineering, Oakland University
B.S., Mechanical Engineering, GMI Engineering & Management Institute (now Kettering University)
Organizations & Affiliations
Michigan Intellectual Property Association (MIPLA), Member
PTAB Bar Association, Conference Committee
State Bar of Michigan
Federal Bar Association Eastern District of Michigan Chapter
Recognitions
“Ones to Watch,” Best Lawyers, 2021-2022
Presentations
Moderator, “PTAB Judges Roundtable,” PTAB Bar Association Annual Conference, March 2026
Co-Presenter, “The Evolving Landscape of PTAB Proceedings: Developments, Decisions, and Best Practices,” BK Hosted Webinar, January 2026
Moderator, “Lost a Decision, Now What?” PTAB Bar Association Annual Conference, March 2025
Co-Presenter, “2024 PTAB Year in Review: New Procedures and Potential Changes Impact AIA Trial Strategies,” BK Hosted Webinar, January 2025
Panelist, “Petitioner Pitfalls and Persuasive POPRs,” PTAB Bar Association Annual Conference, March 2023
Co-Presenter, “PTAB Year in Review: New Designated Decisions and Procedures Impact AIA Trial Strategies,” BK Hosted Webinar, January 2021
Panelist, “Claim Amendments Under the PTAB Pilot Program,” PTAB Bar Association Annual Conference, September 2020
Co-Presenter, “PTAB Year in Review – Designated Decisions, Constitutional Challenges, and AIA Procedures,” BK Hosted Webinar, February 2020
Speaker, Student Alumni Association (SAC), Kettering University, September 2019
Panelist, “Interview with the Chief,” PTAB Judicial Conference, July 2018
Moderator, “Evolving procedural challenges associated with AIA,” Managing Intellectual Property PTAB Forum, May 2018
Presenter, “IP Clinic,” Detroit Fintech Challenge, April 2018
Co-Presenter, “2017 IP Litigation and PTAB Year in Review,” BK Webinar, February 2018
Publications
Quoted, “Federal Circuit Claim Construction Appeal,” Patently-O, June 2026
Co-Author, “Ford IPRs Instituted at Patent Trial and Appeal Board,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, January 2026
Co-Author, “Navigating Patent Claim Drafting for Effective Enforcement,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, January 2025
Co-Author, “Brooks Kushman Secures Favorable Result at PTAB for Patent Owner Y. Evan Spero,” Brooks Kushman Client Alerts, June 2024
Co-Author, “Federal Circuit Rules that PTAB May Not Cancel ‘Challenged’ Claims for Indefiniteness in an IPR Proceeding (but ‘New’ Substitute Claims are Fair Game),” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, February 2020
Co-Author, “PTAB Precedential Opinion Clarifies Standard for Establishing Public Accessibility of a Reference,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, January 2020
Co-Author, “Federal Circuit Finds PTAB Judges to be Unconstitutionally-Appointed ‘Principal’ Officers,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, November 2019
Co-Author, “USPTO Proposes New Rules for Amending Claims During AIA Trial Proceedings,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, November 2019
Co-Author, “USPTO Proposes New Procedures to Expand Availability of Claim Amendments During AIA Post Grant Proceeding,” Brooks Kushman Client Alert, November 2018
Co-Author, “Is Uncle Sam a ‘Person’? Supreme Court Grants Cert to Consider Government Standing in CBM Proceedings,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, November 2018
Co-Author, “PTAB Releases Revised AIA Trial Guide,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, August 2018
Co-Author, “PTAB Designates Two New Informative Decisions Addressing Its Discretion to Deny Review under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) Based on Prior Examination,” Brooks Kushman Client Alert, March 2018
Co-Author, “Federal Circuit Rules That PTAB Rejection of IPR Time-Bar Defense Is Reviewable,” Brooks Kushman Client Alert, January 2018
Co-Author, “PTAB Designates Two New Informative Decisions Addressing IPR Filing Issues,” Brooks Kushman Trending IP Blog, January 2018
Co-Author, “Supreme Court To Review PTAB Practice Of Partial Review,” Brooks Kushman Client Alert, June 2017