• vcard
D 314.552.6883
F 314.754.8310
  • Education
    • J.D., cum laude, Hamline University, 1988
    • B.A., Tulane University, 1980
  • Court Admissions
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 1993
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, 1990
    • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 1999
    • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, 1997
    • U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, 1995
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 2003
    • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, 2000
    • U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois, 2008
    • U.S. District Court, District of Kansas, 2009
    • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, 2012
Keith Grady is the Chair of the Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation Practice Group. With over 27 years of experience in government and private law practice, clients turn to Keith for both ongoing counsel and immediate litigation needs. He takes a strategic approach to developing, enforcing and defending clients' intellectual property and furthering their business interests. Clients have said Keith has "a rational, common sense approach to IP litigation matters. He is willing to do what is best for the client, and knows when to dig in his heels, concede a point, or settle."

Keith has first chair experience in all phases of intellectual property litigation and has appeared in courts throughout the country in preliminary injunction hearings, claim construction hearings, summary judgment hearings, and jury trials. He has also presented a number of oral arguments at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on behalf of his clients.

Keith represents and has represented publicly traded companies and major manufacturers in patent litigation in a variety of technological areas, including:  chemical, pharmaceutical, nutritional supplement, software, medical device, and mechanical devices. Keith also regularly represents clients in litigation involving technology-related disputes, trademarks, trade secrets, unfair competition, internet domain names, and trade dress. He is a frequent writer and speaker on various topics, including Hatch-Waxman litigation, patent litigation, defense of claims brought by patent trolls, trademark litigation and copyright issues.

Keith is ranked in Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business, Intellectual Property (Missouri), 2012-2016; and was selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2012-2016 for Intellectual Property Litigation; IP Stars 2014-2016; and Missouri & Kansas Super Lawyers, 2012-2016.

Before entering private practice, Keith worked as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Missouri, a Staff Attorney for the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth and Eighth Circuits, a Law Clerk, for Judge Charles A. Shaw and Judge George F. Gunn of the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, and a Law Clerk for Judge R.A. (Jim) Randall of the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Keith's extensive experience with trial and appellate courts gives him particular insight into their decision-making process.

  • Successfully defended Kikkerland Design in a design patent infringement claim filed by B & R Plastics with the U.S. International Trade Commission and the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The ITC case was dismissed upon the discovery of evidence of invalidity. 
  • Successfully defended pet grooming tool manufacturer, Sergeant’s Pet Care Products, Inc., in patent litigation involving two patents related to pet grooming tools in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The case settled on favorable terms. 
  • Successfully represented patent holder in an infringement action filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The patents involve abbreviated dialing code technology. The case settled on favorable terms.
  • Successfully represented Allied Healthcare Products Inc. on a claim for alleged infringement of a patent related to carbon dioxide absorbers for use with anesthesia machines.  The court granted summary judgment of non-infringement.
  • Successfully defended pet grooming tool manufacturer, Coastal Pet Products, Inc., in patent litigation involving two patents related to pet grooming tools in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The case settled on favorable terms. 
  • Successfully defended pet grooming tool manufacturer Munchkin, Incorporated, in a patent and trademark infringement matter and defeated motion for preliminary injunction. The district court’s opinion is published as FURminator, Inc. v. Ontel Prods. Corp., 429 F. Supp. 2d 1153 (E.D. Mo. 2006). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed. 
  • Successfully defended Missouri Concrete Shavers in patent infringement action filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The case settled after successfully obtaining reexamination of the asserted patent. 
  • Successfully defended electronic stock exchange, BATS Trading, in a patent infringement action originally filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.  Succeeded in obtaining a mandamus petition to have the case transferred to the Southern District of New York, prevailed on the claim construction arguments, and won a summary judgment ruling of non-infringement. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment. 
  • Successfully defended United Missouri Bank in a patent infringement action pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The patent involved systems and methods for limiting spending via corporate credit cards and allowance cards. The court invalidated the patent on summary judgment. 
  • Successfully defended nutritional supplement company, SourceOne Global Partners, in declaratory judgment action involving allegations of patent and trademark infringement related to three patents. Obtained favorable claim construction ruling following Markman briefing. Case settled on favorable terms. 
  • Involved in the representation of bicycle component parts manufacturer SRAM Corporation in patent litigation concerning its gear shifting technology in the Northern District of California.  SRAM prevailed on its construction of the claim terms in dispute in a published opinion, SunRace Roots Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2003) and the case settled on favorable terms.  
  • Involved in defending a manufacturer of medical equipment, Sofamor Danek Group, Inc., in a two-week jury trial and one-day court trial that involved, among other things, a claim for assignment of a number of patents concerning medical devices. The district court refused to assign the patents in a published opinion. 
  • Successfully defended Strategic Resource Optimization and SRO e-Health, Inc. ("SRO") in a $31 million breach of contract claim brought by its distributor Aion Partners LLC, involving technology license agreement related to patented disinfectant product for use in hospitals.
Related News


Past Events