George E. Quillin

Partner/Retired

Back

George E. Quillin

Partner/Retired

Admissions

  • South Carolina
  • District of Columbia
  • United States Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

George E. Quillin is a retired partner and intellectual property lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP. George has litigated patent interferences and patent appeals, and counseled clients in patent prosecution. He was chair of the firm’s Patent Office Trials Practice and a member of the IP Litigation, Mechanical & Electromechanical Technologies and Appellate Practices. He represented Greene’s Energy in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 1365 (2018).

Awards and Recognition

  • Peer review rated as AV Preeminent®, the highest performance rating in the Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ system
  • Recognized for post-grant procedures (2012-2013, 2015-2018, 2020) and for prosecution (2014, 2020-2021) among IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners
  • In 2016, George was recognized by The Legal 500 for his work in patent prosecution

Affiliations

  • Member of the South Carolina, District of Columbia, and Federal Circuit Bar Associations
  • Christian Legal Society

Education

George is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy (B.S., 1973) and served with the Army (in the 82d Airborne Division, as well as in Germany) prior to attending law school. He received his law degree in 1984 from the University of South Carolina, where he took American Jurisprudence Awards (top honors in his class) in fiduciary administration, property, and trusts & estates. George was a member and then team captain of the University of South Carolina College of Law National Moot Court Team (1983-1984).

16 August 2021 Blogs

Qualcomm Prevails at Federal Circuit Based on Lack of Notice and Adequate Opportunity to Respond

In Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., the Federal Circuit held that Qualcomm was not afforded notice of, or an adequate opportunity to respond to, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) novel construction of an undisputed claim limitation. Thus, the court vacated the PTAB’s determination that Qualcomm’s patent was invalid.
15 July 2021 In the News

Intellectual Asset Management Recognizes Foley Attorneys in 2021 Patent 1000 Guide

Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) has recognized 15 Foley attorneys in the 10th edition of its Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Professionals guide.
06 July 2021 In the News

Quillin Highlights Arthrex Decision as Key Patent Ruling of 2021 for Law360

Foley Partner George E. Quillin was quoted in Law360’s first half recap of the key patent rulings and decisions in 2021, “The Biggest Patent Rulings Of 2021: A Midyear Report.”
01 July 2021 Blogs

What Will Arthrex Review Look Like?

Because Director review on PTAB decisions was not set forth by Congress in the America Invents Act, the Court's suggestion in Arthrex of the Director's power of review naturally raises questions about how this authority will be exercised.
24 June 2021 Blogs

Justices Craft Their Own Remedy for Violation of Constitution’s Appointments Clause

On June 21, 2021, the justices ruled 5-4 that the “unreviewable authority” of administrative patent judges meant those APJs were appointed in violation of the Constitution’s appointments clause.
22 June 2021 In the News

Quillin Reacts to Arthrex Decision for IP Watchdog

Foley Partner George E. Quillin was quoted in the IP Watchdog article, “Industry Reacts to the Supreme Court’s Arthrex Ruling: Chaos Averted – or Just Delayed?” on the decision in closely-watched U.S. Supreme Court patent case, United States / Smith & Nephew v. Arthrex.
View All Insights
View Newsroom