Scott W. Hansen

I'll research this attorney's background and the tracked case.

Let me dig into the tracked case and the notable patent outcome.

Let me verify the Snap-on appeal outcome and check for PTAB/IPR involvement and the specific Aspex case role.

Scott W. Hansen — Patent Litigation Summary

Specialty / focus. Hansen is a Milwaukee-based complex commercial litigator rather than a patent specialist per se, but patent work sits inside a broader practice focused on bet-the-company disputes, antitrust, franchise/dealership, and intellectual property litigation. Best Lawyers recognizes him in "Litigation – Patent" alongside antitrust and franchise categories. His documented patent matters are concentrated in mechanical/electrical and consumer-goods technology — lithium-ion battery packs for cordless power tools (Milwaukee Electric Tool v. Snap-On), power-tool and retail antitrust disputes (the SawStop/SD3 matters, Orchard Supply Hardware v. Home Depot), and magnetic clip-on eyewear (the Aspex Eyewear line of cases). He serves manufacturers (tools, chemicals, durable goods), health care providers and insurers, and financial institutions. I found no public indication of Wi-Fi/standards-essential-patent, pharmaceutical, or life-sciences patent work.

Side preference. The authoritative case list shows a single tracked appearance on the defendant side (0 plaintiff / 1 defendant), which is consistent with his profile as a defense-side complex-litigator. That said, his most prominent patent result was as lead trial counsel for a patent-owning operating company plaintiff — Milwaukee Electric Tool — so his patent practice is best characterized as representing operating companies on both sides, not NPE/PAE enforcement. No NPE/PAE prosecution pattern appears in the record.

Firm context. Hansen has spent his career at Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren s.c. (Milwaukee), where he is currently of counsel in the Litigation Practice; earlier firm announcements and directories describe him as a shareholder. No prior firm is disclosed in the sources reviewed. State Bar of Wisconsin honored him in 2026 for 50 years of practice.

Notable cases / outcomes. Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. v. Snap-On Inc., No. 14-cv-1296 (E.D. Wis. 2017), 288 F. Supp. 3d 872 — Hansen led the trial team; a jury found willful infringement of three lithium-ion battery-pack patents and awarded a $27.8M reasonable royalty (reported by the firm as a ~$31M judgment with interest), described as the largest jury verdict in the history of the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The court denied Snap-On's JMOL/new-trial motions; the case had been stayed while Snap-On pursued IPRs that failed to invalidate the patents (Snap-On's IPRs — not Hansen's — so this is not evidence of his own PTAB practice). In the SawStop/SD3 line, Reinhart obtained summary judgment dismissing the remaining case against Black & Decker (E.D. Va. 2016), and in Aspex Eyewear v. Vision Service Plan (9th Cir. 2010) Hansen represented the defendant-appellee VSP, successfully defending denial of a preliminary injunction. The tracked case, Aspex Eyewear, Inc. et al. v. Altair Eyewear, Inc., is the magnetic clip-on eyewear patent dispute (S.D.N.Y., later D. Mass.), in which the defendant prevailed on summary judgment of non-infringement as to two of three patents; the Federal Circuit reversed in part as to the '054 patent. I could not verify Hansen's specific role in the Altair matter beyond the tracked listing.

PTAB / IPR. No public record found showing Hansen personally appearing in IPR/PGR proceedings. Flagging this as unverified — his patent experience appears to be district-court and appellate litigation.

Bar / education. Admitted Wisconsin, 1976; J.D., University of Wisconsin Law School (1976); B.S. (Economics), University of Wisconsin–Madison (1973). Admitted to the Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals; has appeared pro hac vice in numerous federal and state courts.

Note: all figures and outcomes above are drawn from court opinions, firm press materials, and press coverage; items I could not independently verify (e.g., his exact role in the Altair case and any PTAB practice) are expressly flagged as unconfirmed.