Michael L. Jespersen

Senior Counsel

Back

Michael L. Jespersen

Senior Counsel

Detroit 313.234.7144

Practice Areas

Education

  • University of Michigan Law School (J.D., cum laude, 2018)
    • Contributing editor, Michigan Law Review
    • Senior judge, Legal Practice Program
    • Treasurer, Intellectual Property Students Association
  • University of Oregon (Ph.D., 2008; M.S. chemistry, 2004)
    • National Science Foundation IGERT fellow
  • University of Wyoming (B.S., cum laude, 2001)

Admissions

  • Michigan
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Dr. Michael (Mike) Jespersen advises clients in the pharmaceutical, energy, and chemistry and materials science industries on protecting their technological innovations in an evolving patent landscape. Mike works closely with clients from the earliest stages of product development to tailor worldwide patent strategies to their technical and business goals. He leverages his uniquely diverse technical knowledge of chemistry and materials science to guide product development and IP portfolio development in parallel.

Mike counsels clients across a diverse range of technology areas in the life sciences and energy sectors, including pharmaceutical formulations, gene therapies, fuel cells, ethanol production, carbon capture, semiconductor polishing, polymer formulations, foods and beverages, glasses, and coatings. In addition to handling all phases of patent drafting and worldwide patent prosecution for companies of all sizes, from startup ventures to some of the world’s foremost technology companies, Mike is well versed in providing opinions on patentability, invalidity, and freedom-to-operate.

Before joining Foley, Mike was a research chemist and National Research Council postdoctoral fellow at the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Materials and Manufacturing Directorate, where he developed advanced materials concepts in surfaces and coatings, polymer nanocomposites, nanoelectronics, bionanomaterial hybrids, photovoltaics, and nanomaterials synthesis and characterization. Collectively, Mike has published more than 20 articles and a book chapter covering a range of nanomaterials and related technologies.

Awards and Recognition

  • Recognized by the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the State Bar of Michigan for pro bono work advising clients on patent and trademark matters
  • Received the ABA-BNA Intellectual Property Law Award (2018)
  • Received awards for Best Overall Performance and Best Appellate Brief in Legal Practice (2015 – 2016)
  • Darrow scholar at Michigan Law

Presentations and Publications

  • M.L. Jespersen; J.P. Meara; G.E. Quillin, “Extending Cuozzo: Supreme Court Holds § 315(b) One-Year Time Bar Determinations Are ‘Final and Nonappealable,’ ” PTAB Trial Insights (April 2020)
  • M.L. Jespersen, “One-Year Time Bar for IPR Filing Triggered Even When Served Complaint Is Voluntarily Dismissed,” PTAB Trial Insights (November 2018)
  • M.L. Jespersen, “Inter Partes Review Appeals: The Federal Circuit’s Standing Requirement,” Dashboard Insights (August 2018)
  • M.L. Jespersen; A. Jankowski, “Could the Flying Car Finally Take Off?” Dashboard Insights (July 2016)
  • N.R. Glavin; M.L. Jespersen; M.H. Check; J.J. Hu; A.M. Hilton; T.S. Fisher; A.A. Voevodin. “Synthesis of Few-layer, Large Area Hexagonal Boron Nitride by Pulsed Laser Deposition,” Thin Solid Films 572: 245–250 (2014)
  • M.D. Clark; M. L. Jespersen; R.J. Patel; B.J. Leever, “Ultra-thin Alumina Layer Encapsulation of Bulk Heterojunction Organic Photovoltaics for Enhanced Device Lifetime,” Organic Electronics 15(1): 1–8 (2014)
  • M.L. Jespersen; P.A. Mirau; E.D. von Meerwall; H. Koerner; R.A. Vaia; R. Rodriguez; N.J. Fernandes; E.P. Giannelis, “Hierarchical Canopy Dynamics in Nanoscale Ionic Materials,” Macromolecules 46(24): 9669–9675 (2013)
  • M.L. Jespersen; P.A. Mirau; E.D. von Meerwall; R.A. Vaia; R. Rodriguez; N.J. Fernandes; E.P. Giannelis, “NMR Characterization of Canopy Dynamics in Nanoscale Ionic Materials,” in NMR Spectroscopy of Polymers: Innovative Strategies for Complex Macromolecules; H.N. Cheng; T. Asakura; A.D. English, Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 1077; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, pp. 149–160 (2011)
  • M.L. Jespersen; P.A. Mirau; E.D. von Meerwall; R.A. Vaia; R. Rodriguez; E.P. Giannelis, “Canopy Dynamics in Nanoscale Ionic Materials,” ACS Nano 4(7): 3735–3742 (2010)
  • D.B. Ito; M.L. Jespersen; J.E. Hutchison, “Selective Growth of Vertical ZnO Nanowire Arrays Using Chemically Anchored Gold Nanoparticles,” ACS Nano 2(10): 2001–2006 (2008)
  • M.L. Jespersen; C.E. Inman; G.J. Kearns; E.W. Foster; J.E. Hutchison, “Alkanephosphonates on Hafnium-Modified Gold: A New Class of Self-Assembled Organic Monolayers,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 129(10): 2803–2807 (2007)
24 October 2023 PharmaPatents

Time Is Running Out For The EPO’s 10-Day Rule

Stakeholders accustomed to having “ten more days” to respond to a communication from the European Patent Office will have to update their calendaring systems for documents dated on or after November 1, 2023.
30 January 2023 Blogs

USPTO-FDA Listening Session — Voices from Patient and Patent Advocates

On January 19, 2023, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held a “listening session” focusing on USPTO-FDA collaboration initiatives proposed pursuant to President Biden's Executive Order on “Promoting Competition in the American Economy” to “promote greater access to medicines for American families.”
07 October 2020 Press Releases

Foley’s Detroit Office, 18 Attorneys Honored For Pro Bono Service

Foley’s Detroit office and 18 of its attorneys have been named to the State Bar of Michigan’s 2020 A Lawyer Helps Pro Bono Honor Roll.
22 April 2020 Blogs

Extending Cuozzo: Supreme Court Holds § 315(b) One-Year Time Bar Determinations Are “Final and Nonappealable”

In Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP, the Supreme Court held that 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) precludes judicial review of the PTAB’s decision to institute inter partes review (IPR) even on a petition filed beyond the 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) one-year time bar. Interpreting the statute to effectuate what it determined was Congress’s legislative purpose, to “weed out bad patent claims efficiently,” Justice Ginsburg’s majority opinion concluded that a PTAB institution decision resolving a § 315(b) challenge is “final and nonappealable” – and therefore insulated from judicial review.
16 April 2020 Press Releases

USPTO Recognizes Foley Lawyers and Patent Professionals for Pro Bono Service

Six Foley lawyers and a patent agent were recipients of the 2019 USPTO Patent Pro Bono Achievement Certificate, which recognizes individuals and law firms who help make the Patent Pro Bono Program available to financially under-resourced inventors and small businesses. Those recognized were:
14 November 2018 Blogs

One-Year Time Bar for IPR Filing Triggered Even When Served Complaint Is Voluntarily Dismissed

An IPR cannot be instituted when the petitioner has been served a patent infringement complaint more than 1 year before filing its petition. Learn more here.
View All Insights
View Newsroom