Glenn Dean Bellamy

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Let me dig into the tracked cases and any PTAB activity.

Glenn D. Bellamy — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus areas. Bellamy is a generalist intellectual property litigator whose patent work skews mechanical and electro-mechanical rather than standards-based or life-sciences. His firm bio describes portfolios spanning "firearms and hydraulic machinery, to biomedical devices and optics, to toys and games," and his listed practice areas are Litigation/Dispute Resolution, Mechanical/Aerospace, and Trademarks. His prosecution-side USPTO filings reinforce that profile — heavy volume for Jaguar Land Rover, Vestas Wind Systems, L&P Property Management, GE, Tokyo Electron, BOMAG, Ormco, Henny Penny, and several university tech-transfer offices (University of Cincinnati, Ohio University). There is no visible Wi-Fi/SEP, pharmaceutical, or software-platform docket.

Side preference. In the tracked sample he appears exclusively on the plaintiff/patent-owner side (2 of 2), and both matters are part of the same enforcement campaign: ABC IP, LLC (patent owner) and Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. (exclusive licensee) asserting forced-reset-trigger patents against makers and sellers of competing "Super Safety"-style products. This is patentee-side enforcement by an operating company and its licensing affiliate, not a classic NPE/PAE portfolio campaign. His firm bio, however, states he also handles defense-side work ("enforcing, and defending global portfolios"), and he has defended trade dress and publishing matters — so the plaintiff-only tracked record likely reflects a limited two-case sample rather than a strict one-sided practice.

Firm context. Partner and Co-Practice Group Leader – Litigation at Wood Herron & Evans LLP in Cincinnati, where both tracked appearances are filed. He previously practiced in Seattle (member of the Washington bar, 1998–2019; officer of the Washington State Patent Law Association, 1993–1998) and was an adjunct professor at Seattle University School of Law, 1996–1998. Earlier positions listed: Managing Partner, Barnard Pauly & Bellamy (1987–1998); Of Counsel, Frost Brown Todd (1989–2001); and Of Counsel, Greenebaum Doll & McDonald (2001–2010).

Notable cases and outcomes. Rare Breed Triggers Inc. et al. v. Hoffman Tactical LLC et al. (E.D. Tenn., No. 1:25-cv-00389) is the most prominent tracked matter, with Bellamy as lead counsel; the court entered a TRO in December 2025 and, after a three-day hearing in January 2026, found infringement of claim 1 of the '784 patent and claim 15 of the '247 patent and granted preliminary injunctive relief (bond set at $20,000). The second tracked case, Rare Breed Triggers Inc. et al. v. Z3 Productions LLC (W.D. Okla., No. 5:25-cv-00695), is a single-defendant suit on the '247 patent in which he entered as of counsel; the docket reflects an amended pro hac vice admission and an amended answer with counterclaim attaching a defense-side invalidity letter responding to the client's cease-and-desist campaign. Both matters sit within the broader enforcement effort now centralized as In re: Rare Breed Triggers Patent Litigation, MDL No. 3176 (J.P.M.L. Apr. 2, 2026), and Bellamy has appeared pro hac vice for the same plaintiffs in numerous constituent cases. He also filed a declaration supporting Rare Breed's summary judgment motion in the related D. Utah in rem forfeiture proceeding, United States v. Miscellaneous Firearms and Related Parts (No. 1:23-cv-00017), which drew on the National Association for Gun Rights, Inc. v. Garland ruling that forced reset triggers are not machineguns. One procedural item worth noting: in Rare Breed Triggers Inc. v. Big Daddy Enterprises Inc. (M.D. Fla., No. 1:25-cv-00181), defendants filed a renewed motion to disqualify Bellamy in August 2025; I could not verify the disposition from available sources, so no outcome should be assumed.

PTAB / IPR experience. I found no verified IPR, PGR, or CBM appearances for him in searches; his prosecution practice (USPTO Reg. No. 32887) is extensive, and TTAB activity is documented (e.g., Clyde Armory, Inc. v. Nighthawk Custom opposition, 2015), but AIA trial experience is not corroborated by anything I located. Treat PTAB trial practice as unverified.

Bar / education. Ohio (1999; previously Washington, 1998–2019); registered with the USPTO; admitted in the Federal Circuit, 5th, 6th, 9th, and 11th Circuits, the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court of International Trade, and multiple district courts. J.D., University of Cincinnati College of Law (1987); B.S. in Nuclear Medicine Technology, University of Cincinnati (1984).