Jeffrey D. Blake

Specialty / focus areas. Jeffrey D. Blake is a partner in the Atlanta office of Merchant & Gould P.C., where his practice spans all aspects of IP litigation and counseling. Per the firm's published profile, his technology concentrations are the pharmaceutical and electrical arts — including Hatch-Waxman/ANDA litigation, Section 337 ITC proceedings, semiconductor circuitry, telephony, microprocessor hardware/software, network security, and automotive software — with trial and Federal Circuit appellate experience. His one tracked district-court appearance, Omni MedSci, Inc. v. WHOOP, Inc. (D. Del., filed 2025), concerns wearable physiological-monitoring patents directed to near-infrared/optical sensor technology, which is consistent with the electrical/biomedical side of his practice. He also holds a B.S.E.E., which underpins his electrical engineering work.

Side preference. The tracked data shows Blake on the plaintiff side (1 of 1 appearances, as lead counsel), representing Omni MedSci — a patent owner the Delaware court characterized as a non-practicing entity, though Omni disputes that label. His broader career, however, has historically skewed defense-side for operating companies: he has represented major pharmaceutical companies in Hatch-Waxman and ITC matters and electronics companies such as Intel, Lucent/AT&T, and Texas Instruments. His IPR practice also includes petitioner work for operating companies (Cisco) and entities such as the Coalition for Affordable Drugs. On this record, he appears comfortable on either side, with the tracked matter reflecting NPE/patent-owner-side work.

Firm context and notable matters. Blake is a partner at Merchant & Gould and formerly practiced at Fish & Neave, the New York IP boutique. Firm-published representative matters include Takeda v. Teva (lansoprazole), Teva v. AstraZeneca (rosuvastatin, including Federal Circuit oral argument), an ITC Section 337 matter on alendronate salts, Texas Instruments v. Linear Technology, and Via Technologies v. Intel. In the tracked Omni MedSci v. WHOOP case, the court granted WHOOP's stay motion (conditioned on estoppel) in light of parallel IPRs/PGRs brought by Samsung and WHOOP against the Omni MedSci patent family; WHOOP's PGR and Samsung's challenges have resulted in institution and, in related Apple-litigation IPRs on the same family, PTAB unpatentability findings affirmed by the Federal Circuit (Blake's role in those parallel PTAB proceedings is not confirmed on the record reviewed).

PTAB / IPR and credentials. Blake is regularly active before the PTAB — the firm profile notes he is "actively involved" in IPR work, and USPTO/PTAB records show him as lead or back-up counsel in IPRs for Cisco, MotorTech, and Coalition for Affordable Drugs, among others. He is registered at the USPTO (Reg. No. 58,884), admitted in New York (2001), Georgia (2008), and before the Federal Circuit; he earned his J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law (2000) and a B.S.E.E. (summa cum laude) from the University of Alabama (1997).