Michael N. MacCallum

Michael MacCallum is a member of Dickinson Wright’s Intellectual Property practice group. He focuses his practice on domestic and international intellectual property protection, counseling, and enforcement. Having clients ranging from Fortune 100 corporations to independent inventors, Mike has a depth of experience in all aspects of patent protection and enforcement. His focus is on a wide range of mechanical and computer technologies, including artificial intelligence (improvements to machine learning and neural networks), autonomous vehicles, cloud computing, smart home environments, and product design.

In addition to patent preparation and prosecution, Mike has successfully navigated his clients through inter partes review procedures at the Patent Office, as well as litigation associated with those procedures. He has acted as lead attorney on a plethora of inter partes review proceedings as both the petitioner and patent owner.  Mike also has experience guiding his clients through trade secret disputes.

Prosecution Matters

• Serves as patent counsel and managing attorney for multiple global Tier-1 automotive suppliers on the prosecution, development, and strategy relating to their patent portfolios. Mike leads a team of lawyers and manages portfolios that relate to infotainment systems, instrument clusters, safety components, HVAC systems, drive trains, sensory systems, and autonomous machine learning technologies. Mike also routinely prepares invalidity and freedom-to-operate opinions.
• Manages a substantial patent prosecution portfolio for a global automotive and technology company focused on artificial intelligence, including machine learning, neural networks, data processing, and related software technologies.
• Represents a major automotive supplier in patent prosecution matters involving vehicle HVAC systems and a range of other automotive technologies and components.
• Handles patent prosecution for a leading powertrain manufacturer involving diesel-engine technologies, braking systems, and related vehicle and engine components.
• Represents a global automotive technology supplier in patent matters involving advanced driver-assistance and active-safety technologies, including vehicle image processing, perception systems, and related electronic control technologies.
• Handles patent prosecution matters for a leading medical-device company involving cardiovascular technologies, including aortic stents, transcatheter heart valves, and related medical devices.

Post-Grant Matter:  

• STIHL Incorporated et al v. ElectroJet Technologies, Inc. (PTAB): Lead Counsel representing ElectroJet as patent owner in multiple IPR proceedings involving engine-control technology, including successfully obtaining denial of institution as to all 29 challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,225,793
• Ford Motor Company v. Paice LLC (PTAB): Represented Ford during the pendency of the 22 inter partes review proceedings challenging the validity of hundreds of claims across five separate patents.  Patent Trial and Appeal Board held 273 patent claims were unpatentable.
• Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a Linctex v. CLO Virtual Fashion Inc. (PTAB): Represented patent owner CLO Virtual Fashion in three inter partes review proceedings challenging patents covering CLO’s innovative 3D garment-design technology. Successfully defeated institution of all three IPR petitions, preserving the asserted patent portfolio. Case Nos. IPR2024-00967, IPR2024-00970, and IPR2024-00980.
• Everi Payments Inc. v. Sightline Payments LLC (PTAB): Represented Everi in a coordinated series of five inter partes review proceedings challenging patents directed to electronic payment and account-funding technologies used in gaming environments. The PTAB instituted review and ultimately determined all challenged claims to be unpatentable. Case Nos. IPR2022-00614, IPR2022-00663, IPR2022-00696, IPR2022-00706, and IPR2022-00707.
• Bestway (USA), Inc. v. Intex Marketing Ltd. (PTAB): Represented Bestway as petitioner in a post-grant review challenging 24 claims of a patent directed to above-ground pool frame technology. Following Bestway’s PGR petition, the patent owner statutorily disclaimed all challenged claims, eliminating the asserted subject matter. PGR2024-00036.

Litigation Matters:

• CLO Virtual Fashion Inc. v. Zhejiang Lingdi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a Linctex: Represented CLO Virtual Fashion in a patent infringement dispute involving competing 3D garment-design software. After successfully defeating three related IPR petitions, the matter concluded with Linctex admitting that its accused Studio software infringed CLO’s three asserted patents and acknowledging that the patents are valid and enforceable.
• Maxchief v. Plastic Development Group (Settlement – E.D. Michigan): Lead counsel for Defendant, Plastic Development Group (PDG) in a patent infringement matter regarding blow-molded tables. Successfully transferred the case to E.D. Michigan shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision in TC Heartland. Also served as counsel to PDG during inter partes review proceedings to challenge the asserted patent’s validity. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted on all grounds for all challenged claims. The case settled favorably shortly after transferring to PDG’s home forum and institution of the inter partes review.  Case No. 2:17-cv-12662
• WP Banquet, LLC et al. v. Target Corporation et al. (Settlement – C.D. California): Lead counsel for furniture manufacturer Plastic Development Group and retailer Target accused of infringing four patents. Successfully moved to sever and stay the case for Plastic Development Group’s customer Target. Managed to secure a favorable settlement on behalf of Plastic Development Group shortly thereafter. Case No. 2:16-cv-02082
• ElectroJet Technologies, Inc. v. STIHL Incorporated (E.D. Virginia) – Successfully represented Electrojet in patent lawsuit relating to engine timing control. Case No. 2-17-cv-00224

• Co-Author, PTAB Establishes Criteria Governing Follow-On Petitions for AIA Post-Grant Proceedings
• Co-Presenter, “2017 IP Litigation and PTAB Year in Review,” Webinar, February 2018