Scott A. McKeown

I'll research this attorney's professional background before drafting.

Let me verify the notable cases and the Wolf Greenfield bio details.

Scott A. McKeown — patent litigation practice summary

Specialty / focus. McKeown's practice is centered on post-grant proceedings at the USPTO — his tracked docket is dominated by IPR/PGR work — together with related Federal Circuit appeals and parallel district court and ITC litigation. He holds a B.S. in electrical engineering and worked as an electrical engineer before law school; firm and directory bios describe his technical experience as covering wireless telecommunication protocols, semiconductors, network architectures and signaling protocols, analog and digital signal processing, software, e-commerce applications, consumer electronics, and medical devices. The tracked cases are consistent with that mix: network security (Centripetal/Palo Alto Networks), streaming and content protection (the Roku matters), life sciences and medical devices (LifeNet Health v. Zimmer Biomet; Charles River Laboratories v. Seikagaku), and gaming peripherals (Collective Minds Gaming v. Ironburg Inventions).

Side preference. He works both sides rather than specializing in one posture. Of 16 tracked appearances, 10 are plaintiff-side and 6 defendant-side — but the plaintiff-side entries are largely IPR petitions filed by operating technology companies, most visibly Palo Alto Networks' petitions against Centripetal Networks, not NPE/PAE assertion work. He also defends operating companies in district court (Palo Alto Networks in E.D. Va.) and handles Patent Owner-side PTAB work. Nothing in the tracked record indicates a patent-assertion-entity practice.

Firm, bar, and education. He is a shareholder in Wolf Greenfield's Post-Grant Proceedings Practice in the firm's Washington, D.C. office, which he joined from Ropes & Gray, where he chaired the firm's PTAB group. Earlier in his career he was at Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, and at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner (the latter appearing on the tracked list). He earned a B.S. in electrical engineering and a J.D. from Temple University (Beasley School of Law); he is admitted in Pennsylvania (1999), Virginia (2004), and D.C. (2018), registered before the USPTO (Reg. No. 42,866), and admitted to the Federal Circuit and the PTAB. Note a sourcing conflict on the J.D. year — Martindale lists 1998, other profiles 1999; a Best Lawyers entry stating 2018 appears to be an error.

Notable matters and PTAB experience. PTAB work is his defining practice: firm and directory bios credit him with more than 400 PTAB matters since 2012 (Chambers' 2026 profile says 500+), and he is a founding director of the PTAB Bar Association and author of the PatentsPostGrant.com blog. On the Palo Alto Networks/Centripetal litigation, the Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB obviousness holdings invalidating Centripetal's network-security patents '028 and '126 (Oct. 31, 2024); vacated and remanded the '903 decision for inadequate motivation-to-combine reasoning (Dec. 16, 2024); and in October 2025 vacated an '856 decision for failure to weigh copying evidence while rejecting Centripetal's APJ-recusal challenge. On the Roku side, the ITC's exclusion order against Roku in Universal Electronics' 337-TA-1200 investigation was affirmed, 90 F.4th 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2024), with Roku later filing a cert petition (No. 24-180); in Roku's dispute with VideoLabs, its IPRs were cited in support of a stay of the Delaware action. Two tracked entries are captioned only as "Untitled case," and the Collective Minds v. Ironburg matter's outcome could not be verified from the sources reviewed, so no result is attributed to them here.