Chris Jones is an experienced patent litigator that focuses his practice on Hatch-Waxman and life sciences patent litigation. Chris has developed a deep understanding of the Hatch-Waxman litigation process and has litigated cases involving Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDAs), 505(b)(2) applications (sometimes referred to as “paper NDAs”), and more. He has experience at all stages of Hatch-Waxman cases and has litigated cases through trial both in United States District Courts and at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Chris also has experience advising clients on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process, and understands the importance of balancing the complexities of FDA regulatory and patent litigation issues.

Chris has a diverse background in chemical and biochemical technologies, including pharmaceutical chemistry, organic chemistry, solid-state chemistry, biochemistry, polymer chemistry and cell biology. As a graduate student, his research focused on drug development and formulation, specifically the development and characterization of solid and crystalline forms of new and existing drug compounds. Prior to graduate school, Chris performed research projects related to the synthesis and characterization of polymers, organic compounds useful in the field of agricultural chemistry and also worked in a cell biology laboratory on the development of cancer therapies.

While earning his J.D. at George Mason University School of Law, Chris worked as a patent agent and technology specialist, where he used his background in chemistry to assist patent attorneys with opinion preparation and patent prosecution matters. He was a member of the Intellectual Property Law Society and graduated with a concentration in intellectual property law.

Education

  • Antonin Scalia Law School - George Mason University (J.D., 2018)
    • Patent Law Track
    • Intellectual Property Law Society
  • University of South Florida (M.A., 2014)
    • Chemistry
    • USF Fellow
  • High Point University (B.S., Dean's List, 2012)
    • Chemistry
    • Presidential Scholar

Bar Admission

  • District of Columbia
  • Admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office
Publications
All Publications
Federal Circuit Addresses Prosecution History Estoppel, Disclosure-Dedication Rule in Affirming ANDA Product Noninfringement Decision
Key Takeaways The Federal Circuit held that an ANDA product formulation did not infringe, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, patent claims that require lyophilized pharmaceutical compositions of epoprostenol “having a pH of 13 or higher.” Relying on both intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, the court affirmed the District Court’s construction of the pH claim phrase, which required the pH value to be measured at a standard temperature rather than at lower temperatures where the pH value may be different. The decision underscores how scientific measurement conditions can affect infringement outcomes in pharmaceutical patent cases. The decision also reinforces the continued importance of prosecution history estoppel and the disclosure-dedication rule in cases involving infringement allegations under the doctrine of equivalents. Patent litigants should
Read More
Federal Circuit Denies Challenges to USPTO Director’s Discretionary Denial Decisions
Key Takeaways The Federal Circuit upheld the USPTO director’s discretion to deny IPRs, rejecting due process and APA challenges to the agency’s evolving policy framework. The court held that petitioners generally cannot challenge discretionary denials, even after the agency retroactively applied its new discretionary denial procedures to IPRs filed under the prior framework. Parties seeking review of issued patents at the USPTO should consider alternate strategies, including Post Grant Reviews and ex parte reexaminations, which are not currently subject to discretionary denials. On Nov. 6, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued three highly anticipated opinions addressing the USPTO director’s discretionary denial decisions in several IPRs. In all three opinions, the Federal Circuit denied the parties’ petitions for a writ of mandamus and upheld the director’s
Read More