Skip to main content

Scott Seeley

Attorney Profile

Top Rated Intellectual Property Attorney in Bellevue, WA

Eastgate IP
14205 SE 36th St, Suite 100
Bellevue, WA 98006
Phone: 425-296-8220
Email: Scott Seeley
Selected to Rising Stars: 2021 - 2022
Licensed in Washington Since: 2016
Practice Areas: Intellectual Property
  • Free Consultation
Attorney Profile

Scott is an intellectual property lawyer and registered patent attorney.  Scott’s intellectual property practice includes patent prosecution, trademark registration, and post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, such as inter partes review.

About Scott Seeley

First Admitted: 2016, Washington

Professional Webpage:


  • The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew Federal Circuit decision.  The case presents two issues concerning whether Administrative Patent Judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board are constitutionally appointed. Whether Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) are principal officers or inferior officers for purposes of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution; and If APJs are principle officers, whether any Appointment Clause defect was cured when the Federal Circuit severed application of Title 5’s removal protections to APJs., Supreme Court Takes Up Arthrex – A Review of the Issues, PTAB Practitioners, Patent Owners And Defendants
  • The Supreme Court held that a term styled “” is a generic name representing a class of goods or services if the term has that meaning to consumers. More specifically, “,” which is a “” style domain for a digital travel booking company of the same name, was found to be eligible for trademark protection in view of evidence that consumers do not consider the term “” to refer to a generic class of booking services., Supreme Court finds a “” style domain name eligible for trademark protection – USPTO v., Trademark Practitioners, Trademark Holders
  • Apple, Cisco, Google, and Intel have sued the Director of the USPTO, challenging a purported new rule alleged to violate the Administrative Procedure Act and exceed the Director’s statutory authority.  The complaint was filed in the Northern District of California after the NHK and Fintiv cases were designated precedential, purportedly enshrining the Fintiv factors as a new rule binding future decisions. , Apple, Cisco, Google, Intel Sue the Director of the USPTO Alleging Purported New Rule Applying Fintiv Factors Violates Administrative Procedure Act, PTAB Practitioners, Patent Owners And Defendants
  • The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has ruled that artificial intelligence systems cannot be credited as an inventor in a patent — raising questions about the patentability of AI generated inventions., Inventorship for Inventions Created by Artificial Intelligence, Software, Machine Learning, AI
  • A preliminary decision in the District Court of Delaware introduces the possibility that a patentee’s victory on assignor estoppel in the district court could quash a co-pending IPR proceeding at the PTAB., Perhaps Assignor Estoppel Survives at the PTAB…via the District Court , Patent Practitioners
  • Collection of articles published through JD Supra.  Topics include: Assignor Estoppel, Updates to the Law on Cloning, Medical Device News, and Case Summaries. , JD Supra - Authored Posts, Patent Practitioners, Patent Owners And Defendants

Educational Background

  • Juris Doctor, Law, University of Washington School of Law, 2015
  • Bachelor of Science, Chemistry, Biochemistry Specialization, cum laude, Central Washington University, 2012

Scholarly Lectures/Writings

  • The TPP is a multi-national trade agreement between Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States. The stated goals of the TPP are to liberalize trade among member nations and to equalize regulatory restrictions and intellectual property (IP) protections among the parties. This article highlights three intellectual property provisions in the TPP that are pertinent to biopharmaceutical companies., Author, Intellectual Property Issues Under The Trans-Pacific Partnership, Biotechnology, Biosimilars, Pharmaceuticals, 2016
  • This expert analysis discusses how the Federal Circuit analyzes claims of violations of the “notice and opportunity to respond” provisions of the APA.  Specifically, it provides an introduction to the APA and a brief outline of the general filing schedule of an IPR.  It also provides several examples of alleged APA violations while outlining factors the Federal Circuit considers in reaching a determination., Author, Federal Circuit's Treatment of Alleged APA Violations at the PTAB, Patent Practitioners, Patent Owners And Defendants, 2018

Bar/Professional Activity

  • Washington State Bar Admittance, 2016

Special Licenses/Certifications

  • Patent Bar Admittance, 2018


  • Patent Bar Admittance, 2018

Industry Groups

  • Beverage
  • Biotechnology
  • Cosmetics
  • Food
  • Materials
  • Mechanical Devices
  • Medical Devices
  • Small Molecules
  • Software
Show More
Office Location for Scott Seeley

14205 SE 36th St
Suite 100
Bellevue, WA 98006

Last Updated: 9/6/2022

Page Generated: 0.45015692710876 sec