Megan Freeland Raymond

I'll research this attorney's background before writing the summary.

Let me verify the tracked case and a few outcomes.

Megan Freeland Raymond — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus areas. Raymond's practice is centered on post-grant proceedings at the PTAB, supported by district court trial work, ITC matters, and Federal Circuit appeals. Her technology mix is deliberately broad: life sciences and pharmaceuticals (semaglutide/Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus; work for Amgen and Genentech), biotechnology (10x Genomics single-cell sequencing), geospatial/aerial imagery (Nearmap), consumer and mechanical products (expandable garden hoses for Tristar), and, per directory profiles, electronics, software, mobile devices, medical devices, and cryptography. Her pre-law-school background as a research fellow in the FDA's Laboratory of Immunoregulation is consistent with the life-sciences weighting in her docket.

Side preference. The tracked data shows 0 plaintiff-side and 1 defendant-side appearance, and public descriptions are consistent with a defense-oriented practice representing operating companies rather than NPEs/PAEs. She does, however, work both sides of the PTAB posture: as patent owner defending challenged patents (Novo Nordisk against Mylan; 10x Genomics in parallel IPRs) and as petitioner challenging patents (on behalf of Nearmap and, reportedly, Twitter/X). Her Nearmap work is a good illustration — the tracked district court case, Eagle View Technologies, Inc. v. Nearmap US, Inc., is a defense-side representation, while she also acted for Nearmap as petitioner in related IPRs against EagleView.

Firm context and notable matters. She is a partner at Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP in Washington, D.C., the patent litigation boutique founded in November 2022 by former Paul, Weiss IP litigators. Before that she was at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison (appearing as counsel in PTAB filings through 2022), and earlier in her career she was an associate at Ropes & Gray, where she filed PTAB declarations as early as 2013. Verifiable results include the Blue Gentian, LLC v. Tristar Products inventorship counterclaim win for Tristar, affirmed by the Federal Circuit (Nos. 21-2316, -2317, June 9, 2023); representation of Nearmap in the EagleView district court action and parallel IPRs (including the Director Review proceeding in Nearmap v. Eagle View, IPR2022-00734, where the Director vacated and remanded an adverse final written decision); and ongoing Novo Nordisk and 10x Genomics post-grant matters, with three of six 10x Genomics IPRs denied institution.

PTAB / IPR experience. This is the defining feature of her practice — she reports more than 100 post-grant proceedings, is ranked Band 1 by Chambers USA for PTAB, authored PLI's treatise Post-Grant Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and has held leadership roles in the PTAB Bar Association (President) and the Federal Circuit Bar Association's Patent Litigation Committee. She appears regularly in IPR/PGR proceedings as both petitioner and patent owner counsel.

Bar / education. Registered patent attorney (USPTO Reg. No. 72,997); admitted in the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. A.B. in Biochemical Sciences, Harvard University (2001, cum laude); J.D., University of Virginia School of Law (2005); law clerk to Judge Haldane Robert Mayer, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (2005–06).

One data caveat: the tracked docket entry lists her role as "of counsel," while firm and directory sources (Chambers, Benchmark, IAM, the firm website) consistently describe her as a partner at Groombridge Wu. The discrepancy is likely a docket-designation artifact rather than a substantive distinction, but I could not fully reconcile it from public filings.