Chad S.C. Stover

I'll research this attorney's background and practice.

Let me verify the tracked case and search for PTAB/IPR experience and notable outcomes.

Let me verify the notable outcomes — the $31M verdict and the ACCO Brands Federal Circuit appeal.

Chad S.C. Stover — Barnes & Thornburg LLP (Wilmington, Del.)

Focus areas. Stover is an intellectual-property litigator whose practice centers on patent, trademark, copyright, unfair-competition and trade-secret litigation, with a strong technology mix spanning mechanical and electrical arts, consumer/office products, financial services, life sciences and agricultural technology, and networking/videoconferencing software. His B.M.E. (mechanical engineering) and his USPTO registration (Reg. No. 54471) underpin a prosecution docket that has included biopharma/agbio applicants such as Ipsen Biopharm, Precigen/Intrexon and Corteva, as well as mechanical/consumer applicants. A substantial share of his work is as Delaware counsel in the District of Delaware, and he sits as a special discovery master there.

Side preference. The tracked database reflects a single appearance — one defendant-side engagement as local counsel in Cisco Systems v. Intelligent Protection Management (D. Del.) — so the tracked record alone is too thin to establish a directional preference. Public descriptions indicate a genuinely two-sided practice: he defends operating companies in competitor-on-competitor patent and trade-secret suits, while also representing plaintiffs/licensing-side clients (e.g., Amicus Therapeutics in a pharma patent action) and concentrating heavily on serving as Delaware local counsel for out-of-state firms. Nothing in the available sources indicates a specialty in NPE/PAE plaintiff-side assertion.

Firm context and notable matters. Stover has been a partner at Barnes & Thornburg since October 2013, joining the Wilmington office from Novak Druce Connolly Bove & Quigg (successor to Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz), where he was also a partner; he was reunited there with former Connolly Bove colleagues. In the tracked case, Cisco sued Intelligent Protection Management Corp./Paltalk in the District of Delaware (1:25-cv-00271, Judge Noreika) over videoconferencing patents (U.S. 8,830,293 and 8,941,708); IPM is also the petitioner in a parallel IPR (IPR2025-01588) against Cisco's '293 patent. Firm bio materials (self-reported, not independently verified) credit him with a $31 million jury verdict in a patent-infringement and trade-secret case, and with obtaining early summary judgment for ACCO Brands in a Southern District of New York patent case that he then defended on appeal to the Federal Circuit.

PTAB/IPR and credentials. His name appears in PTAB-adjacent filings and in district-court transcripts used as exhibits in IPR proceedings (e.g., the Corteva/Inari Agriculture dispute), but the public record does not clearly show him as lead counsel in a substantial number of IPR/PGR petitions; his IPR exposure appears primarily as parallel district-court litigation counsel rather than as a regular PTAB advocate. He is admitted in Delaware and South Carolina, before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and before the Federal Circuit; he holds a J.D. from the University of North Carolina School of Law (2003, editor-in-chief of the North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology) and a B.M.E. from the University of Delaware.

Note: the $31M verdict and ACCO Brands results are drawn from the firm's own biography and could not be matched to a named docket or opinion in this review; they should be treated as unverified pending confirmation.