Sara M. Metzler

I'll research Sara M. Metzler's professional background before drafting.

Let me research her PTAB/IPR activity and key case outcomes.

Let me check the NPE-side cases and any IPR involvement in those matters.

Practice focus and side mix. Sara M. Metzler is a Wilmington, Delaware litigator whose practice, per her firm bio, centers on commercial and intellectual property litigation in Delaware's state and federal courts. Her tracked patent matters span several technology areas: Hatch-Waxman/ANDA pharmaceutical litigation (the Veloxis Envarsus XR tacrolimus cases against Accord/Intas, Alkem, and related defendants), solar/photovoltaic technology (Runergy v. Trina Solar), and telecom/Wi-Fi and software disputes (Disintermediation Services v. T-Mobile; Intercom v. Disintermediation). Her 14 tracked appearances split 9 defendant-side and 5 plaintiff-side, and she appears on both the patent-owner/plaintiff side (e.g., Cisco v. Intelligent Protection Management, Disintermediation Services) and the accused-infringer/defendant side (Veloxis generics, Runergy). Much of this work is in a Delaware local-counsel capacity alongside out-of-state lead firms.

Firm context. All tracked appearances are at Richards, Layton & Finger, where she is listed as Counsel (elected counsel effective July 1, 2025, per Law.com's Delaware Business Court Insider). No prior firm appears in the public record; before rejoining the firm in 2022 she clerked for the Hon. Jennifer L. Hall of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (2019–2022), the court in which most of her patent cases are venued.

Notable matters. The Veloxis ANDA litigation is among her most substantial tracked patent work; in Veloxis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc. (D. Del. 1:22-cv-00909) she represented the generic defendants, and a consent judgment was entered January 24, 2024. The Runergy/Trina Solar dispute is a multi-front campaign over TOPCon solar-cell patents; the district court action was stayed pending ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1425 and parallel IPRs (IPR2025-00006/-00007). Chinese-language reporting indicates the PTAB issued final written decisions invalidating all challenged claims of the two asserted patents, with Runergy and Trina later resolving the U.S. actions — that outcome should be independently verified before relying on it. She also appears as counsel in other Delaware patent matters that are not in the tracked list (e.g., Robocast v. Netflix, Scale Biosciences v. Parse Biosciences).

PTAB/IPR and credentials. USPTO PTACTS records show her listed as Richards Layton counsel in PTAB filings, i.e., she has appeared in AIA proceedings, though the frequency and substantive scope of her PTAB role (e.g., whether as local/back-up counsel) is not fully documented in public sources. Bar admissions: Delaware (2018) and the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (2018). Education: Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., cum laude (2017); University of Michigan, B.S., High Distinction, Psychology/Mathematics (2011).