Careers

At M&G, we dedicate ourselves to finding the best solutions to our clients’ challenges, no matter where it takes us.

Case Studies

Industries

Offices

About Merchant & Gould

Pages

People

News Room

Practices

Staff

Home - Merchant & Gould P.C.

James W. Beard is an IP attorney in Merchant &amp; Gould’s Denver office. While his practice involves all facets of intellectual property law, James focuses on patent, trade secret, and trade dress litigation for clients from a diverse range of industries.

contentpilot/introduction

James W. Beard is an IP attorney in Merchant &amp; Gould’s Denver office. While his practice involves all facets of intellectual property law, James focuses on patent, trade secret, and trade dress litigation for clients from a diverse range of industries.

IP Litigation Attorney With Over 10 Years of Experience

core/heading

<h2>IP Litigation Attorney With Over 10 Years of Experience</h2>

James brings over ten years of litigation experience on complex matters to the table. His experience includes representing high-technology household names and Fortune 500 companies in a wide range of industries such as:

core/paragraph

James brings over ten years of litigation experience on complex matters to the table. His experience includes representing high-technology household names and Fortune 500 companies in a wide range of industries such as:

core/list-item

List Item

<li>Consumer products and technology</li>

core/list

<ul><li>Computer hardware and software</li><li>Electronics</li><li>Consumer products and technology</li><li>Biotechnology</li><li>Medical devices</li></ul>

James works in all stages of litigation, from general advice and counseling to complex discovery, trials, and appeals. His experience also includes motion practice, claim construction, and post-trial motion practice and appeal. In the past, he’s represented clients in district courts around the country, the International Trade Commission and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

James works in all stages of litigation, from general advice and counseling to complex discovery, trials, and appeals. His experience also includes motion practice, claim construction, and post-trial motion practice and appeal. In the past, he’s represented clients in district courts around the country, the International Trade Commission and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

Dedicated to Creating Innovative Strategies for IP Cases

Introduce new sections and organize content to help visitors (and search engines) understand the structure of your content.

Heading

heading

Heading that resizes to fit its container.

stretchy-heading

Stretchy Heading

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Dedicated to Creating Innovative Strategies for IP Cases</h2>

<h2>Dedicated to Creating Innovative Strategies for IP Cases</h2>

Intellectual property cases are complex and require a great depth of strategy to address each client’s overarching business goals. James prides himself on being able to find novel and innovative arguments based on complex fact patterns and aligning his clients’ business interests with their litigation needs.

Start with the basic building block of all narrative.

In a village of La Mancha, the name of which I have no desire to call to mind, there lived not long since one of those gentlemen that keep a lance in the lance-rack, an old buckler, a lean hack, and a greyhound for coursing.

Paragraph

paragraph

Paragraph that resizes to fit its container.

stretchy-paragraph

Stretchy Paragraph

Intellectual property cases are complex and require a great depth of strategy to address each client’s overarching business goals. James prides himself on being able to find novel and innovative arguments based on complex fact patterns and aligning his clients’ business interests with their litigation needs.

<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Litigation Requires Curiosity</h3>

Litigation requires curiosity; attorneys must enjoy seeking new challenges, arguments, and ideas to best serve their clients. As an inquisitive litigator, James is passionate about new technology as well as discovering how innovative techniques and methods can benefit his clients.

Litigation requires curiosity; attorneys must enjoy seeking new challenges, arguments, and ideas to best serve their clients. As an inquisitive litigator, James is passionate about new technology as well as discovering how innovative techniques and methods can benefit his clients.

James received his J.D. from the University of California, Hastings College of Law. He has been selected for inclusion in Super Lawyers Rising Stars Edition lists each year from 2013 to 2019. He has also authored multiple publications, including:

James received his J.D. from the University of California, Hastings College of Law. He has been selected for inclusion in Super Lawyers Rising Stars Edition lists each year from 2013 to 2019. He has also authored multiple publications, including:

An organized collection of items displayed in a specific order.

List

<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Chapter Editor,&nbsp;Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments, American Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section (2011).</li>



<li>Karen Boyd and James Beard, Patent Marking: True AND False in 11th Annual Silicon Valley Advanced Patent Law Institute, Advanced Patent Law Institute (2010).</li>



<li>James Beard, Note: A Better Carrot: Incentivizing Patent Reexamination, 1 Hastings Sci. &amp; Tech. L.J. 169 (2009).</li>



<li>James Beard and Albert Halluin, An Analysis of CIGS Solar Cell Technology, 6 Nano. L. &amp; Bus. 19 (2009).</li>



<li>James Beard, The Limits of Licensing: Quanta v. LGE and the New Doctrine of Simultaneous Exhaustion, 2008 UCLA J. L. Tech. 3 (2008)</li>



<li>James Beard, Weeds in the Docket: Patent Continuation Reform and Its Effects on the Biotechnology Industry, 90 J. Pat. &amp; Trademark Off. Soc’y 423 (2008).</li>
</ul>

Chapter Editor,&nbsp;Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments, American Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section (2011).

<li>Chapter Editor,&nbsp;Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments, American Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section (2011).</li>

Karen Boyd and James Beard, Patent Marking: True AND False in 11th Annual Silicon Valley Advanced Patent Law Institute, Advanced Patent Law Institute (2010).

<li>Karen Boyd and James Beard, Patent Marking: True AND False in 11th Annual Silicon Valley Advanced Patent Law Institute, Advanced Patent Law Institute (2010).</li>

James Beard, Note: A Better Carrot: Incentivizing Patent Reexamination, 1 Hastings Sci. &amp; Tech. L.J. 169 (2009).

<li>James Beard, Note: A Better Carrot: Incentivizing Patent Reexamination, 1 Hastings Sci. &amp; Tech. L.J. 169 (2009).</li>

James Beard and Albert Halluin, An Analysis of CIGS Solar Cell Technology, 6 Nano. L. &amp; Bus. 19 (2009).

<li>James Beard and Albert Halluin, An Analysis of CIGS Solar Cell Technology, 6 Nano. L. &amp; Bus. 19 (2009).</li>

James Beard, The Limits of Licensing: Quanta v. LGE and the New Doctrine of Simultaneous Exhaustion, 2008 UCLA J. L. Tech. 3 (2008)

<li>James Beard, The Limits of Licensing: Quanta v. LGE and the New Doctrine of Simultaneous Exhaustion, 2008 UCLA J. L. Tech. 3 (2008)</li>

James Beard, Weeds in the Docket: Patent Continuation Reform and Its Effects on the Biotechnology Industry, 90 J. Pat. &amp; Trademark Off. Soc’y 423 (2008).

<li>James Beard, Weeds in the Docket: Patent Continuation Reform and Its Effects on the Biotechnology Industry, 90 J. Pat. &amp; Trademark Off. Soc’y 423 (2008).</li>

<ul><li>Chapter Editor,&nbsp;Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments, American Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section (2011).</li><li>Karen Boyd and James Beard, Patent Marking: True AND False in 11th Annual Silicon Valley Advanced Patent Law Institute, Advanced Patent Law Institute (2010).</li><li>James Beard, Note: A Better Carrot: Incentivizing Patent Reexamination, 1 Hastings Sci. &amp; Tech. L.J. 169 (2009).</li><li>James Beard and Albert Halluin, An Analysis of CIGS Solar Cell Technology, 6 Nano. L. &amp; Bus. 19 (2009).</li><li>James Beard, The Limits of Licensing: Quanta v. LGE and the New Doctrine of Simultaneous Exhaustion, 2008 UCLA J. L. Tech. 3 (2008)</li><li>James Beard, Weeds in the Docket: Patent Continuation Reform and Its Effects on the Biotechnology Industry, 90 J. Pat. &amp; Trademark Off. Soc’y 423 (2008).</li></ul>

In his spare time, James enjoys downhill skiing, road cycling, home brewing, and Texas-style barbecue.

In his spare time, James enjoys downhill skiing, road cycling, home brewing, and Texas-style barbecue.

contentpilot/expand-more

<section class="wp-block-contentpilot-expand-more"><div class="wp-block-contentpilot-expand-more__excerpt is-visible" data-selector="expand-more"></div><div class="wp-block-contentpilot-expand-more__full-content" data-selector="expand-more"><h2>Dedicated to Creating Innovative Strategies for IP Cases</h2>Intellectual property cases are complex and require a great depth of strategy to address each client’s overarching business goals. James prides himself on being able to find novel and innovative arguments based on complex fact patterns and aligning his clients’ business interests with their litigation needs.<h3>Litigation Requires Curiosity</h3>Litigation requires curiosity; attorneys must enjoy seeking new challenges, arguments, and ideas to best serve their clients. As an inquisitive litigator, James is passionate about new technology as well as discovering how innovative techniques and methods can benefit his clients.James received his J.D. from the University of California, Hastings College of Law. He has been selected for inclusion in Super Lawyers Rising Stars Edition lists each year from 2013 to 2019. He has also authored multiple publications, including:<ul><li>Chapter Editor,&nbsp;Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments, American Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section (2011).</li><li>Karen Boyd and James Beard, Patent Marking: True AND False in 11th Annual Silicon Valley Advanced Patent Law Institute, Advanced Patent Law Institute (2010).</li><li>James Beard, Note: A Better Carrot: Incentivizing Patent Reexamination, 1 Hastings Sci. &amp; Tech. L.J. 169 (2009).</li><li>James Beard and Albert Halluin, An Analysis of CIGS Solar Cell Technology, 6 Nano. L. &amp; Bus. 19 (2009).</li><li>James Beard, The Limits of Licensing: Quanta v. LGE and the New Doctrine of Simultaneous Exhaustion, 2008 UCLA J. L. Tech. 3 (2008)</li><li>James Beard, Weeds in the Docket: Patent Continuation Reform and Its Effects on the Biotechnology Industry, 90 J. Pat. &amp; Trademark Off. Soc’y 423 (2008).</li></ul>In his spare time, James enjoys downhill skiing, road cycling, home brewing, and Texas-style barbecue.</div><button class="wp-block-contentpilot-expand-more__more-button is-visible" data-selector="expand-more">Show More</button><button class="wp-block-contentpilot-expand-more__less-button" data-selector="expand-more">Show Less</button></section>

University of California - Hastings College of the Law, J.D., 2009, 

University of California - Berkeley, B.S. Political Science; Religious Studies, 2006, 

he / him / his

Computer Technology

Consumer Products

Electronics

Manufacturing

Denver

Los Angeles

James Beard joins as partner in Litigation Practice Group.



Merchant & Gould is pleased to announce that James Beard joined the firm’s Denver office as a partner on Jan. 10.



As an IP trial lawyer, James brings more than 10 years of experience to the Litigation Practice Group, representing high-technology household names and Fortune 500 companies in computer hardware and software, electronics, consumer products, biotechnology and medical device industries.  He works on all stages of litigation, from general advice and pre-litigation counseling through complex discovery, motion practice, trials, and appeals.  Prior to joining Merchant & Gould, James worked at Sherman & Howard in Denver, as well as Kirkland & Ellis in San Francisco.



“James is an excellent addition to our Litigation Practice Group, as we continue expand our capabilities in Denver and across the firm,” said Chris Leonard, Managing Partner and CEO of Merchant & Gould.  “He has experience in some of Colorado’s most innovative industries, spanning a range of technologies. We are excited to have him join us.”

Merchant & Gould Hires Attorney, as Denver Office Grows

Covid-19 is proving to be the impetus the legal industry needed to embrace remote technologies, Merchant & Gould attorneys write. They look at how law firms are adjusting to new technologies now and how courts may adopt new technologies going forward.



In law firms, one might guess the graduation year of attorneys based only on the technologies employed in their practices.



Lawyers graduating in the last decade may have never even seen a dictaphone in person or have experienced paper cuts from thumbing through thousands of paper documents to prepare them for production in litigation. Only recently did a small number of litigators begin using tablets instead of paper documents in depositions. Nearly all litigators firmly believed it was not possible to effectively conduct a deposition or hearing remotely.



But the Covid-19 pandemic forced change in an age-old profession, nearly overnight. As courthouses around the country continue trials and hearings, and even close completely, courts and attorneys alike have been forced to adopt new technologies at every stage of proceedings.



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The Present: Evolution of Litigation</h2>



Some areas of civil litigation were already primed for a 21st century make-over. Even before the outbreak, attorneys occasionally conducted remote depositions by telephone, shipping documents in large boxes across the country to unseen witnesses. But with offices now closed and no resources or time to print and ship documents, attorneys have within a matter of weeks begun use of virtual video technology for depositions and hearings.



Several vendors already offer, and are quickly deploying and scaling, platforms that allow electronic versions of documents to be loaded in advance and published individually through the course of testimony. Screens can be shared to facilitate discussion of documents, though the ability to annotate exhibits in real-time sometimes requires creative work-arounds.



And while people around the country are already familiar with videoconferencing technology—FaceTime meet-ups and kids’ playdates held over Zoom—these technologies have seen rapid adoption in litigation as well.



With <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article241976371.html">some amusing exceptions</a>, many courts have successfully deployed remote presence technologies to hold hearings (especially on temporary restraining orders and other matters not easily delayed), examine witnesses, and hold conferences. Balancing the need to avoid <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/boston/news/press-releases/fbi-warns-of-teleconferencing-and-online-classroom-hijacking-during-covid-19-pandemic">Zoom bombing</a> and interruptions to proceedings with the public’s right of access to court proceedings can be a difficult balance, especially while courts and attorneys are already grappling to deploy new technologies.



Special cases, like mediations and arbitrations, present their own challenges. These proceedings benefit from the neutral’s ability to separate the parties and discuss—frankly, if not brutally—the strengths and weaknesses of the respective arguments. But Zoom and other platforms also provide for the ability to “separate” the parties into <a href="https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/206476313-Managing-Video-Breakout-Rooms">virtual breakout rooms</a>. The physical (and social) separation of the parties can dampen emotions as well, possibly providing an unexpected benefit driving quicker settlement.



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The Future: Resumption of Trials</h2>



While remote technologies were adopted quickly in litigation before trial, how do courts handle jury trials before a vaccine is developed for Covid-19? The vast majority of district courts across the country have continued jury trials. But the Constitution mandates a right to a speedy trial. How to conduct a socially distanced jury trial remains largely unanswered.



Jury trials may present insurmountable issues, including how to effectively voir dire and empanel a jury, much less ensure that Juror No. 4 is not updating Facebook at home (or reading a New York Times article about the defendant) during cross examination. On the plus side, sequestration of juries in sensitive matters tried in districts under “stay at home” orders would prove somewhat easier.



Beyond the logistical concerns with seating a jury in the first instance, a trial will compound telepresence technology’s deficiencies. Trial litigators learn to read witnesses in person and, more importantly, the room and sculpt their examination in response to a jury’s visible reaction to the answers. Even high resolution video might conceal micro expressions, or excuse a momentary hesitation responding to questions as a lag caused by a slow connection.



New technologies, including virtual reality, might further bridge the gap, but pose their own dramatic limitations. If a video feed dampens the expressions and reactions of a witness, the technology to read, translate, and accurately reproduce a witnesses’ facial expressions in a virtual reality environment certainly do not exist yet—much less at a scale that would permit large scale, affordable deployment.



Some variation on social distancing might permit courts to resume trials, first criminal and then civil. Courts may err on the side of smaller jury panels where permitted by statute and rule, or excuse jurors with comorbidities, the elderly, or those with compromised immune systems. But whatever course courts adopt, it’s clear that resumption of jury trials will have dramatic, if not intractable, impacts on the process.



Courts around the country have bought the system time, protecting the health of judges, parties, and the public. But when operations begin to resume, as they must, new technologies will have become ingrained in the legal profession.



Travel for depositions may seem unnecessary, hearings conducted via Zoom (in a suit, of course) may be the norm. Covid-19 may not do away with dictaphones, but even attorneys fully set in their ways are sure to adopt the newest of these technologies and apply them after life resumes.



This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. or its owners.



<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Author Information</h2>



<a href="https://www.merchantgould.com/Professionals/James-W-Beard">James W. Beard</a> is an IP litigation attorney and partner in Merchant & Gould’s Denver office. His practice involves all facets of intellectual property law, working to tailor creative solutions to complex disputes for clients from a diverse range of industries.



<a href="https://www.merchantgould.com/Professionals/Heather-J-Kliebenstein">Heather J. Kliebenstein</a> is an IP litigation attorney, partner and chair of the firm’s litigation practice group in Merchant & Gould’s Minneapolis office. With deep technology and IP experience, she is the go-to resource for companies requiring focused, strategic intellectual property insight.



The views of this article are those of the authors, and not the firm.



<figure class="wp-block-image"><img decoding="async" src="https://db0ip7zd23b50.cloudfront.net/dims4/default/7bc1f89/2147483647/legacy_thumbnail/80x80%3E/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbspot-prod.bna.com%2Forca%2Fapi%2Frendition%2Fpng%2Fim260491.png%3Fdigest%3D17e7455dce43cc4b4345bf18e1fc631a89e042bae3ed1dca7bf571313e6510d1" alt="James W.  Beard"/></figure>



<a href="/people/james-w-beard/">James W. Beard</a> – Merchant & Gould P.C.



<figure class="wp-block-image"><img decoding="async" src="https://db0ip7zd23b50.cloudfront.net/dims4/default/c162fc0/2147483647/legacy_thumbnail/80x80%3E/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbspot-prod.bna.com%2Forca%2Fapi%2Frendition%2Fpng%2Fim260492.png%3Fdigest%3D3606c6112ecfbb172ac0f7ffb2d58aeb631d0acea2857ac3eafec55067bafccf" alt="Heather J.  Kliebenstein"/></figure>



<a href="/people/heather-j-kliebenstein/">Heather J. Kliebenstein</a> – Merchant & Gould P.C.



Reproduced with permission. Published May 11, 2020. Copyright 2020 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. 800-372- 1033. For further use, please visit <a href="https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/l0MGCxklAnc1DRwWUvJki2?domain=bna.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://www.bna.com/copyright-permission-request/</a>

INSIGHT: How Covid-19 Changed the Future of Litigation

Merchant & Gould is pleased to announce that <a href="/people/james-w-beard/">James W. Beard</a>, a Denver partner, and <a href="/people/joseph-w-dubis/">Joe Dubis</a>, a Minneapolis associate, have been named Litigation Paralegal Co-Supervisors, effective Jan. 1, 2022. They replace <a href="/people/william-d-schultz/">Will Schultz</a> who served as Supervisor for more than five years. 



James and Joe will manage the firm’s Litigation Paralegals across Merchant & Gould’s seven offices and oversee their work on depositions, witness preparation, exhibits, court preparation and research, as well as reviewing docketing and case file management procedures.  They will also coordinate communication with and development of the group, helping the team as it implements new technologies.  With more than 50 litigators and litigation support team members, the firm’s Litigation Practice Group has extensive IP trial and litigation experience.  



“In their co-supervisor roles, James and Joe combine their litigation knowledge with their attention to detail and management skills to supervise this very important paralegal team with the Litigation Practice Group. Together, they bring their leadership and insight to the team,” said Christopher J. Leonard, Managing Director and CEO of Merchant & Gould.



While his practice involves all facets of intellectual property law, James focuses on patent, copyright, and trademark and trade dress litigation for clients from a diverse range of industries. He works in all stages of litigation, from general advice and counseling to complex discovery, trials and appeals.



Joe practices all areas of intellectual property litigation proceedings including patent, copyright, and trademark litigation; appellate work; and post grant proceedings. Joseph’s motivation to become a lawyer was partly to help bridge the gap between inventors, scientists, and developers and the intellectual property protection they deserve. Since beginning as a litigation associate, Joe has developed extensive skills in the field of copyright disgorgement remedies.



Congratulations, James and Joe!

James Beard and Joe Dubis Named Litigation Paralegal Co-Supervisors

11th Circuit Holds There Is No Prevailing Party when a Dispute Ends in a “Tie”

CAFC Vacates Preliminary Injunction Prohibiting Patent-Related Speech

Litigation

Trade Secret

Yeng Yang

Partner

Represented a distillery in a trademark opposition before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, including trial briefing and oral argument before the Board. The Board sustained the opposition in favor of the client, recognizing client’s rights in the mark.
Represented plaintiff and counter-defendant in litigation concerning trade secret misappropriation and multiple allegations of breach of contract. Litigated through discovery, securing an amicable settlement agreement.
Represented plaintiff and counter-defendant as lead counsel in multi-forum patent and trade dress dispute. Secured dismissals with prejudice of patent claims and six denials of institution of petitions for inter partes review, leading to an amicable settlement agreement.
Represented plaintiff and counter-defendant as lead counsel in multi-forum patent and trade dress dispute.  Secured dismissals with prejudice of patent claims, six denials of institution of petitions for inter partes review, and an amicable settlement agreement was reached dismissing all claims between the parties.
<h3>Before joining, James was involved in representations including:</h3>
Represented an HVAC manufacturer in multi-patent dispute, that resulted in a final verdict of non-infringement in favor of the client and additional verdicts of invalidity for numerous asserted claims.
Represented a consumer products manufacturer in a multi-forum dispute spanning district court, the International Trade Commission, and the Court of International Trade, which resulted in an amicable resolution.
Represented a consumer products manufacturer in a patent dispute relating to the use of QR codes.  Secured a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice following filing of a motion to dismiss and exchange of invalidity positions.

James W. Beard

<h3>Publications</h3>
<a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/insight-how-covid-19-changed-the-future-of-litigation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">INSIGHT: How Covid-19 Changed the Future of Litigation</a>, Co-Authored with Heather Kliebenstein, Bloomberg Law (May 7, 2020)
<a href="https://www.merchantgould.com/portalresource/Best-Practices-For-Managing-Litigation-During-Pandemic.pdf">Best Practices For Managing Litigation During Pandemic</a>, Co-Authored with Heather Kliebenstein, Law360 (April 23, 2020).

James W. Beard

IP Litigation Attorney With Over 10 Years of Experience

Practices

Industries

Representative Cases

Education

Admissions

Publications & Speaking Engagements

Publications