Sean M. Wesp

I'll research this attorney before drafting.

Professional Summary — Sean M. Wesp

Specialty / focus. Wesp is a Washington, D.C.–based intellectual property litigator whose tracked work centers on Section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission. The record available on him is dominated by computer network security and network-infrastructure technology — specifically the patent dispute over network traffic monitoring and packet-correlation technology between Centripetal Networks and Keysight Technologies — rather than pharma or mechanical arts. He is recognized in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch (2026) in Intellectual Property Law and Litigation – Intellectual Property, and third-party ITC analytics (LexDana, covering 2020–2025) rank him among the more active ITC practitioners, including a top-10 placing on the respondent side.

Side preference. The authoritative case list shows a single tracked appearance, on the defendant/respondent side (0 plaintiff, 1 defendant), and the verifiable ITC record is consistent with that defendant-leaning posture: he has appeared as counsel for respondent Keysight Technologies in Inv. No. 337-TA-1314, defending an operating company against a patent-asserting complainant. In other words, the record reflects defense-side Section 337 work for technology manufacturers rather than NPE/PAE-side assertion. (One caveat: a "Sean Wesp" appears in N.D. Ill. filings in MacNeil Automotive Products Ltd. v. Yita LLC (No. 2:20-cv-00278, D. Ill.), filing declarations supporting plaintiff-side motions in 2025; the firm affiliation is not shown in the docket excerpt, so I cannot confirm it is the same attorney.)

Firm context. Wesp has been at Polsinelli PC since January 2023, joining as an associate as part of the seven-attorney group — alongside Deanna Tanner Okun, Lauren E. Peterson, and Daniel F. Smith — that launched Polsinelli's ITC Section 337 Litigation and Trade Remedies Practice in its D.C. office. The tracked appearance lists his firm as "AMS Trade"; I could not independently verify an entity by that name as a law firm of record for him, and no prior law firm history (e.g., a pre-2023 employer) is confirmed in the sources I could reach.

Notable matters. His most prominent verified matters arise from the Centripetal–Keysight litigation. In ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1314, Certain Computer Network Security Systems (ALJ McNamara), the Commission issued a final determination of no Section 337 violation on December 5, 2023, and terminated the investigation. On April 23, 2026, the Federal Circuit affirmed in a nonprecedential decision (Centripetal Networks, LLC v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, No. 24-1416), holding that Centripetal's domestic-industry product failed the "technical prong" of the domestic industry requirement; in a companion appeal (No. 24-1406), the court affirmed the unpatentability of claims of the '917 patent. Parallel proceedings included Centripetal's E.D. Va. district court case (stayed pending appeal) and German/UPC actions in which Centripetal's patents were largely invalidated.

PTAB / IPR. The Centripetal–Keysight dispute involved substantial PTAB activity — the companion Federal Circuit appeal affirming invalidity of the '917 patent claims arose from IPR proceedings — but the searchable record does not confirm Wesp's own appearances in IPR/PGR proceedings, so I would not characterize him as a regular PTAB advocate on this evidence.

Bar / education. J.D., The George Washington University (per Best Lawyers); admitted and practicing in Washington, D.C. Specific bar admission date, state bar number, and undergraduate education were not reliably sourced and are omitted.