Seven Troutman Pepper Locke attorneys have been recognized by Managing Intellectual Property in the 2025 edition of IP Stars. The guide ranks law firms and lawyers based on research conducted by Managing IP, covering both contentious and non-contentious work.

Troutman Pepper Locke attorneys named IP Stars are:

Managing IP is a news and analysis service catering to intellectual property professionals worldwide. The publication bases its individual attorney and practice rankings on client and peer recommendations and research across more than 70 jurisdictions worldwide.

Troutman Pepper Locke’s Intellectual Property Practice develops and implements global protection and commercialization strategies for clients with intellectual property assets in virtually all industry areas. The firm’s forward-thinking, proactive strategies help clients mitigate risk while maximizing protection and value. With resources around the world, including an office in London, its team of attorneys, patent agents, and other professionals offer comprehensive advice on the development, acquisition, management, and monetization of intellectual property.

Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.

NEW YORK – A cross-office Troutman Pepper Locke team secured a favorable settlement, including attorneys’ fees, for pro bono client The Rock Church in a lawsuit against the Town of Castle Rock, Colo. The settlement allows the Church to continue expanding its ministry of providing temporary shelter to individuals experiencing homelessness within its community.

The Church had operated its “On-Site Temporary Shelter Ministry” for five years, offering temporary shelter in recreational vehicles (RVs) on its campus, along with food, clothing, and other vital services to those in need. In 2023, the Town of Castle Rock moved to stop the Church’s efforts, claiming that the Church’s ministry violated applicable land use requirements. Troutman Pepper Locke, in collaboration with co-counsel First Liberty Institute, filed a federal lawsuit in 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, claiming the town’s actions were unlawful under the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act and the First Amendment.

In summer 2024, the team won a preliminary injunction, allowing the Church to continue operating its ministry with two RVs during the lawsuit’s pendency, including through the winter months. In June 2025, the town agreed to a settlement that enables the Church to expand its operations to seven RVs without interference, ensuring the Church can provide essential services to the community in alignment with its religious mission, and requiring the town to pay the Church’s attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing the lawsuit.

Troutman Pepper Locke’s Misha Tseytlin and Josh Davey led the team with support from Kevin LeRoy, Carson Cox, Alex Hill, Dylan DeWitt, Nick Gouverneur, and Robin Platte.

Each year, Troutman Pepper Locke attorneys dedicate thousands of pro bono hours in support of nonprofits, military veterans, children, the wrongfully convicted, civil rights and social justice initiatives, and many other causes. Learn more at troutman.com/pro-bono.

Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.

SAN DIEGO – Troutman Pepper Locke advised Concert Golf Partners (Concert Golf), an upscale, private club owner/operator, in its acquisition of The Club at New Seabury, a 36-hole, luxurious golf and beach club on Cape Cod. The purchase of The Club at New Seabury further elevates Concert Golf as a successor of choice for healthy, thriving, high-end private clubs. For more details, see the press release.

With the addition of the 300-acre seaside club, famously described by legendary U.S. Open Champion Francis Ouimet as the “Pebble Beach of the East,” Concert Golf’s family of clubs now stretches coast-to-coast from the Monterey Peninsula to Cape Cod. Concert Golf’s portfolio now features 39 upscale private clubs across America, adding one of the world’s finest beachfront country clubs.

The Troutman Pepper Locke team advising Concert Golf Partners in the acquisition was led by Michael Whitton and included Benjamin Gourley and Alexis Herskowitz.

Troutman Pepper Locke’s national Real Estate Practice Group helps clients in their most complex real estate transactions. Clients include owners, developers, and financiers of some of the largest projects across the country in both the private and public sectors. The practice has been recognized by several leading industry authorities, including Chambers, Legal 500, and Best Law Firms®, among others.

Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.

Troutman Pepper Locke earned 25+ nationwide practice rankings and more than 125 lawyer recognitions in The Legal 500 United States 2025, an independent ranking authority of law firms around the world. View all firm rankings.

Troutman Pepper Locke was ranked in the following nationwide practice areas, notably earning the highest recognition for its Energy and State Attorneys General practices:

  • Antitrust: Civil litigation/class actions: defense
  • Dispute resolution: E-discovery
  • Dispute resolution: Product liability, mass tort and class action – defense: pharmaceuticals and medical devices
  • Energy: Energy litigation: electric power
  • Energy: Energy regulation: electric power
    • Tier 1 ranking
  • Energy: Energy regulation: oil and gas
  • Energy: Energy transactions: electric power
  • Energy: Energy transactions: oil and gas
  • Energy: Renewable/alternative power
  • Environment: Environment: litigation
  • Environment: Environment: regulatory
  • Environment: Environment: transactional
  • Finance: Commercial lending – Advice to borrowers
  • Finance: Capital markets: debt offerings – Advice to issuers
  • Finance: Project finance – Energy and Power
  • Finance: Financial services regulation – Banking
  • Government: State attorneys general
    • Tier 1 ranking
  • Insurance: Advice to insurers
  • Labor and employment: Employee benefits, executive compensation and retirement plans: design
  • M&A/corporate and commercial: M&A: middle-market (sub-$500m)
  • M&A/corporate and commercial: Private equity buyouts: middle-market (Up to $500m)
  • M&A/corporate and commercial: Venture capital and emerging companies
  • Media, technology and telecoms: Cyber law (including data privacy and data protection)
  • Real estate: Construction (including construction litigation)
  • Real estate: Land use/zoning
  • Real estate: Real estate
  • Tax: International tax

In addition, 11 attorneys received the top Leading Lawyer and Associate and Next Generation Partner recognitions:

Leading Lawyer

Donna Byrne – Energy: Energy regulation: electric power
Clayton S. Friedman – Government: State attorneys general
Mark J. Furletti – Finance: Financial services regulation
Matthew Greenberg – M&A/corporate and commercial: M&A: middle-market (sub-$500m)
Alison A. Grounds – Dispute Resolution: E-discovery
Christopher R. Jones – Energy: Energy regulation: electric power
David Navetta – Media, technology and telecoms: Cyber law (including data privacy and data protection)

Next Generation Partner

Anne C. Loomis – Finance: Project finance – Energy and Power
Mindy McGrath – Energy: Energy regulation: oil and gas
Adrienne L. Thompson – Energy: Energy regulation: electric power

Leading Associate

Case Towslee – Energy: Energy transactions: oil and gas

The Legal 500 assesses the strengths of law firms in more than 150 jurisdictions, highlighting the practice area teams that provide “the most cutting edge and innovative advice to corporate counsel.” Research is based on client feedback, law firm submissions, and interviews with private practice attorneys.

Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.

CHICAGO – Troutman Pepper Locke advised AmTrust Financial Services, Inc. (AmTrust), a multinational insurance holding company, as the sponsor of a Rule 144A catastrophe bond transaction, which will provide Technology Insurance Company, Inc., an AmTrust subsidiary, with $150 million in reinsurance protection for losses from named storm events occurring in the Northeast for three years.

The Troutman Pepper Locke team that advised AmTrust was led by J.P. Hong and included Floy Gaidarski and Julia St. John. In addition, Nick Jennings advised on English law matters, Jaremi Chilton advised on federal income tax matters, Juliane Dziobak advised on security interest matters, and Laura L. Ferguson advised on ERISA matters.

Troutman Pepper Locke’s Insurance Transactional and Regulatory Practice navigates the complex landscape of insurance laws, regulations, and corporate transactions. The team provides strategic counsel to insurance companies, reinsurers, brokers, and other industry stakeholders, ensuring compliance with regulatory frameworks while facilitating mergers, acquisitions, capital raising, restructurings, and innovative market entries. By combining deep experience with industry insights, Troutman Pepper Locke empowers clients to achieve their business objectives while mitigating risks in a highly regulated sector.

Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.

Michael Lowe, a partner in Troutman Pepper Locke’s Health Care + Life Sciences Practice Group, was quoted in the June 17, 2025 Bloomberg Law article, “NCAA’s $2.8 Billion Settlement Gets Congress Moving Toward Fixes.”

The deal provides a level of “stability in the NIL world” that wasn’t there before, offering a better likelihood of legislation advancing, said Michael S. Lowe, a litigation partner with Troutman Pepper Locke.

“There’s definitely an interest from this administration in getting some kind of NIL legislation passed,” he said.

…

The only way for the NCAA to put its antitrust issues to bed is to get a blanket federal liability shield, Lowe said. Just because the deal was approved doesn’t mean the organization is free from antitrust threats.

Student-athletes can still sue the NCAA over any of the settlement provisions, including a controversial cap on college athlete salaries, Lowe said.

…

“Whatever law is passed would need to make it very clear that the things that the House settlement has done are exempted from the Sherman Act,” Lowe said, referring to the settlement’s lead plaintiff, Grant House.

This article was originally published on June 17, 2025 on Law360 and is republished here with permission.

On May 7, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Ingenico Inc. v. Ioengine LLC that inter partes review estoppel does not extend to arguments that the claimed invention is invalid because it was known or used by others, on sale, or in public use.

The court ruled that such arguments constitute grounds that cannot be raised in an IPR according to the statute that established IPR procedures.

This holding limits the scope of IPR estoppel, which may encourage more petitioners to utilize the IPR mechanism to challenge patents. Ironically, this decision comes at a time when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has altered its standards on discretionary denials of IPR petitions in order to manage current Patent Trial and Appeal Board workloads and avoid overburdening the office.

The PTAB has also clarified the petitioner’s burden when relying on prior art cited on an information disclosure statement, but not utilized by the USPTO during prosecution to reject any claims, which may make it more difficult to rely on such art and increase instances of discretionary denial.

Case Background

The appeal in Ingenico included an argument that the district court improperly allowed introduction of certain prior art evidence that the appellant argued should have been precluded based on the statutory IPR estoppel provision.

Specifically, Ingenico filed an IPR challenging Ioengine’s patents asserted in an underlying district court action, which reached a final written decision invalidating certain claims.

At trial, Ingenico relied on a prior art device, and written documentation describing that device, to show that the claimed invention was invalid as known or used by others, on sale, or in public use before the date of invention. The jury returned a general verdict finding the claimed invention invalid as anticipated and obvious in view of that prior art device.

Ioengine’s appeal of the verdict argued that IPR estoppel should have precluded the introduction of documentation related to the prior art device because Ingenico reasonably could have raised that material as part of the IPR. Accordingly, the Federal Circuit was called upon to review the scope of IPR estoppel.[1]

IPR estoppel under Title 35 of the U.S. Code, Section 311(b), prevents IPR petitioners — as well as any other real parties in interest or privies of the petitioner — from asserting in district court that a claim is invalid on any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised in an IPR that reaches a final written decision.

Federal Circuit Decision

The Federal Circuit, for this first time in Ingenico, interpreted the meaning of the term “ground,” which is not defined in the Patent Act, to resolve a split among district courts. The Federal Circuit found that a “ground,” in the context of an IPR, is a theory of invalidity available to challenge a claim for anticipation under Section 102, or obviousness, under Section 103, not the specific prior art asserted.

The Federal Circuit noted that IPR challenges are statutorily constrained to invalidity challenges under Sections 102 and 103, i.e. anticipation or obviousness, based on prior art consisting of patents and printed publications.

Thus, under the statutory framework, an IPR petitioner cannot raise invalidity theories that the claimed invention being known or used by others, on sale, or in public. Accordingly, since those theories that cannot be raised as part of an IPR, they would not be subject to the IPR estoppel provision.

Importantly, because the grounds are not coextensive with the prior art asserted, i.e., the prior art cited is evidence of the asserted ground, not the ground itself, the Federal Circuit stated that IPR estoppel does not preclude an IPR petitioner from relying on the same patents and printed publications used in an IPR proceeding if the invalidity theory is that the claimed invention was known or used by others, on sale, or in public use.

That is, IPR estoppel does not preclude a petitioner from asserting the same prior art relied upon in an IPR in district court, it merely constrains the particular invalidity theories for which that prior art may be utilized in district court.

Impact of Decision

The clarification provided by the Federal Circuit resolves a split among district courts and narrows IPR estoppel. This holding may encourage patent challengers to utilize the IPR procedure, particularly where there may be arguments available in district court that the challenged patent is invalid as being known or used by others, on sale, or in public use.

However, the Ingenico decision comes at a time when the PTAB is increasing the number of discretionary denials based on co-pending district court litigation, to manage PTAB workload. Thus, while Ingenico might narrow IPR estoppel and encourage more petitions, it will not necessarily increase IPR institutions.

As part of its discretionary denial analysis, the PTAB looks at a list of factors based on its precedential decision in Apple Inc. v. Fintiv Inc. in 2020, including whether there is overlap between the issues raised in the IPR petition and the parallel district court proceeding.

To try to avoid discretionary denial, petitioners have utilized stipulations, which have become known as Sotera stipulations, to indicate that they will not advance the same grounds asserted in the IPR petition in district court should the IPR be instituted.

Under prior PTAB guidance, the introduction of a Sotera stipulation at the preinstitution phase, was sufficient to avoid discretionary denial of an IPR petition. However, under the most recent PTAB guidance, issued March 24, the PTAB now analyzes the inclusion of a Sotera stipulation as merely one factor in the Fintiv analysis. We are already seeing discretionary denial rates increase based on this new PTAB guidance

For example, in Solus Advanced Materials Co. Ltd. v. SK Nexilis Co. Ltd. in April, the PTAB provided that while a Sotera stipulation weighs strongly against exercising discretion to deny institution, “a Sotera stipulation that does not moot all invalidity issues before the district court, such as invalidity assertions based on combinations of art with ‘unpublished systems prior art,’ is less effective and will not necessarily outweigh other Fintiv factors that favor discretionary denial.”

In Solus, the PTAB denied institution under the Fintiv factors, despite the Sotera stipulation provided by the petitioner. Thus, while Ingenico narrowed IPR estoppel, petitioners might nevertheless consider providing a stipulation that effectively forecloses any invalidity challenges in the co-pending district court that rely on the particular prior art references raised in the IPR petition, in order to reduce the risk of discretionary denial.

As a result, the ultimate impact of Ingenico is unclear. Narrower IPR estoppel might encourage more petitions, but the tougher standards for petitioners on discretionary denial, and the increasing institution denial rates, might compel petitioners to provide broader Sotera stipulations. Thus, there may be an emerging disconnect between the scope of IPR estoppel and the breadth of a Sotera stipulations necessary to try to avoid institution denial.

Further, petitioners may need to be more selective regarding prior art in light of the increased burden of using art that is cited on an information disclosure statement but not applied by the office to reject the claims during prosecution.

Last month in Ecto World LLC v. RAI Strategic Holdings Inc., the PTAB issued a decision on director review clarifying the petitioner’s burden when using prior art cited on an information disclosure statement but not used in a rejection during prosecution.

Under Section 325(d), the director may deny institution when “the same or substantially the same prior art or arguments previously were presented to the Office.”

In Ecto World, which has been designated precedential with respect to its discussion of that section, the PTAB held that petitioners relying on art appearing on an information disclosure statement but not applied by the office must articulate how the office erred in a manner material to patentability of the challenged claims.

Importantly, the petitioner cannot simply rely on its unpatentability contentions to imply that an error occurred. This decision may also increase the instances of discretionary denial where the petitioner does not adequately demonstrate a material error when relying on art cited on an information disclosure statement.

[1] The Federal Circuit found that there was substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict of invalidity for anticipation or obviousness based at least on public use and therefore did not evaluate the known or used by others or the on-sale issues.

RICHMOND – Troutman Pepper Locke partner Timothy McHugh was honored with the 2025 Military and Veterans Law Pro Bono Award by the Virginia State Bar’s Military Law Section Board of Governors for demonstrating exceptional dedication and impactful work on behalf of U.S. veterans. McHugh, together with David DePippo from Dominion Energy, received this prestigious award for securing a landmark U.S. Supreme Court victory in the case of Rudisill v. McDonough that restored billions in educational benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill, positively affecting approximately 1.7 million veterans.

“As a veteran, being honored with the Military and Veterans Law Pro Bono Award is profoundly meaningful,” said McHugh. “This Supreme Court decision will transform the lives of millions of veterans, opening doors to educational opportunities that were previously out of reach. We worked on this case for the better part of a decade, and this victory is a testament to the power of advocacy and the enduring commitment to those who have served our nation.”

First awarded in 2021, the Virginia State Bar’s Military and Veterans Law Pro Bono Award recognizes those members of the Bar who have dedicated a significant portion of their time and energy to serving and protecting those who protect and serve through pro bono practice.

Each year, Troutman Pepper Locke attorneys dedicate thousands of pro bono hours in support of nonprofits, military veterans, children, the wrongfully convicted, civil rights and social justice initiatives, and so many other causes. Learn more at troutman.com/pro-bono.

Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.

June 10, 2025 – With landmark deals and new federal policies reshaping the market, private equity investors are navigating a briskly evolving landscape rich with opportunity and complexity, a new report from law firm Troutman Pepper Locke has found.

The report, ‘Power Shift: Top Five Private Equity Investment Trends in US Energy,’ draws insights from leading industry specialists to highlight the private equity investment trends currently reshaping the sector.

The findings provide a picture of where capital is flowing — and why — as investors position themselves to benefit from emerging tailwinds in a sector increasingly defined by both resilience and reinvention.

Top five private equity investment trends in U.S. energy:

  1. Data center growth requires many energy sources
  2. Using gas to beat coal internationally
  3. Trump boosts investor interest in oil industry
  4. Solar and storage soar — but wind struggles
  5. Nuclear maintenance attracts niche investors

The report notes that data centers are driving enormous electricity demand — rising from 40GW in early 2025 to a projected 81GW by 2028 — fueled by generative AI. Private equity is backing this growth with a broad strategy focused on scalable, reliable baseload solutions, blending renewables and traditional energy, aligning with the Trump administration’s focus on reliability over climate subsidies. Investors also see a long-term trend of rising electricity use across sectors, not just from data centers, making 24/7 infrastructure a key investment theme.

Natural gas is increasingly considered vital to the global coal-to-clean transition, with strong export potential and domestic demand, especially in growing states like Texas. Investment is shifting toward midstream assets — storage, LNG, and processing — which offer resilience and relative political stability. Gas is also gaining backing from major tech firms seeking to balance electricity needs alongside renewables, reinforcing its role as a key transitional fuel.

Meanwhile, the oil sector is set to rebound amid political tailwinds. Despite market volatility, private equity sees long-term opportunity in U.S. oil under the Trump administration. Some investors are favoring infrastructure and service companies over drilling, betting on the sector’s resilience and demand in developed markets. A shift away from stalled renewable projects is freeing up capital, benefiting oil logistics and infrastructure firms amid a changing policy landscape.

Solar and battery storage have been surging in the U.S., with more than 44GW added in 2024 alone, while wind installations were heading in the opposite direction, hitting a decade-low with less than 5GW installed. Private equity is moving in to support solar developers facing short-term capital gaps, seeing long-term upside. Solar’s speed, scalability, and ease of deployment — especially when paired with storage — is making it more attractive than wind in many cases, which faces site, regulatory, and timeline hurdles. Tariffs and policy shifts are also boosting domestic solar manufacturing as a new investment focus.

Investments in nuclear energy are focusing on the longevity of existing assets, not new builds. Rather than funding construction, private equity is investing in services that support the 94 operating U.S. reactors. Firms are acquiring companies that provide engineering, maintenance, and repair services, essential for ensuring continuous and safe operations. The appeal lies in nuclear’s emissions-free baseload power, which becomes more valuable as the reliance on and build-out of intermittent sources grows.

Jennie Simmons, a partner in the Energy Practice Group at Troutman Pepper Locke, said: “As leading private equity investors have noted in this report, despite changes in policy and market volatility, the U.S. energy sector is surging. By focusing on some of the strategic considerations highlighted, private equity investors can effectively navigate challenges and capitalize on both immediate and long-term opportunities.”

With rising energy demand and a pro-infrastructure administration, private equity is finding value across the energy spectrum — from fossil fuels and nuclear services to solar and gas exports. However, investment strategies and trends appear to be driven more by persistent demand than pure politics, with 2025 shaping up to be a turning point for U.S. energy investors.

To read the full report, click here.

Troutman Pepper Locke’s market-leading energy practices help clients with their most important and complex matters throughout the U.S. and beyond. Whether electric power, oil and gas, or emerging technologies, the cross-discipline team is equipped to handle any related matters, drawing on the depth of the firm’s knowledge in the market. Troutman Pepper Locke regularly advises upstream and midstream companies, service companies, electric utilities, independent power producers, banks, private equity funds, and other public and private entities in the energy industry. Learn more at energylawinsights.com.

About Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.

HOUSTON – Troutman Pepper Locke advised Citadel Casing Solutions, LLC (Citadel), a leading provider of differentiated downhole technologies renowned for driving efficiency and performance in the oil and gas sector, in its sale to Innovex International, Inc. (Innovex), a Houston-based company that designs and manufactures products to support upstream onshore and offshore activities worldwide. For more information, read the press release.

The investment aligns with Innovex’s merger and acquisitions framework, including its focus on single-use, highly engineered products. The transaction values Citadel at approximately 3.8x LTM Adjusted EBITDA and is 8% accretive to Innovex’s EPS. Innovex anticipates realizing approximately $2 million of cost synergies within three months and further long-term synergies as the business is fully integrated.

The Troutman Pepper Locke team that advised Citadel was led by Greg Heath and included Jeff McPhaul, Buddy Sanders, Mark Backofen, Michelle Gutierrez-Begin, Shumaila Dhuka, Mackenzie Purvis, and Lauren Richter.

Consistently recognized as a top-tier practice, Troutman Pepper Locke’s corporate attorneys regularly handle strategic deals for Fortune 100 corporations and middle market transactions for private equity clients. Core areas of service include mergers and acquisitions, corporate finance, corporate governance, securities laws compliance, capital markets transactions, and other significant domestic and cross-border transactions, as well as general corporate counseling.

Troutman Pepper Locke

Troutman Pepper Locke helps clients solve complex legal challenges and achieve their business goals in an ever-changing global economy. With more than 1,600 attorneys in 30+ offices, the firm serves clients in all major industry sectors, with particular depth in energy, financial services, health care and life sciences, insurance and reinsurance, private equity, and real estate. Learn more at troutman.com.