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.

Eric Schweibenz is an experienced litigator who delivers strategic counsel and robust defense for domestic and international companies across various technologies, such as automotive and hybrid electric vehicles, medical devices, semiconductors, gas turbine engines, liquid crystal displays, and the oil and steel industries. Eric's proficiency in managing Section 337 ITC investigations, navigating patent and trademark infringement disputes, antitrust actions, and patent interference cases, has made him a trusted ally for businesses seeking to protect their innovations and market position.

core/paragraph

Eric Schweibenz is an experienced litigator who delivers strategic counsel and robust defense for domestic and international companies across various technologies, such as automotive and hybrid electric vehicles, medical devices, semiconductors, gas turbine engines, liquid crystal displays, and the oil and steel industries. Eric's proficiency in managing Section 337 ITC investigations, navigating patent and trademark infringement disputes, antitrust actions, and patent interference cases, has made him a trusted ally for businesses seeking to protect their innovations and market position.

As a partner at Merchant in the Washington, D.C., Area office, Eric is a member of the Litigation Practice Group. He specializes in complex litigation and counseling clients in diverse industries on a comprehensive array of trademark and copyright law issues. He is committed to helping clients with inter partes review proceedings and ex parte reexaminations at the USPTO, ensuring their intellectual property rights are secure and upheld. With a keen understanding of the challenges posed by non-practicing entities, Eric has developed a reputation for skillfully safeguarding companies from such threats, as well as navigating the intricacies of electronic discovery and meticulous trial preparation.

As a partner at Merchant in the Washington, D.C., Area office, Eric is a member of the Litigation Practice Group. He specializes in complex litigation and counseling clients in diverse industries on a comprehensive array of trademark and copyright law issues. He is committed to helping clients with inter partes review proceedings and ex parte reexaminations at the USPTO, ensuring their intellectual property rights are secure and upheld. With a keen understanding of the challenges posed by non-practicing entities, Eric has developed a reputation for skillfully safeguarding companies from such threats, as well as navigating the intricacies of electronic discovery and meticulous trial preparation.

Eric's collaborative ethos means he works closely with his clients and leverages the collective knowledge within his firm to deliver tailored solutions and desirable legal outcomes. His advisory services extend to the drafting and analysis of critical business agreements, including licensing deals, technology transfers, and collaborative R&amp;D partnerships, all aimed at fostering innovation while minimizing risks.

Eric's collaborative ethos means he works closely with his clients and leverages the collective knowledge within his firm to deliver tailored solutions and desirable legal outcomes. His advisory services extend to the drafting and analysis of critical business agreements, including licensing deals, technology transfers, and collaborative R&amp;D partnerships, all aimed at fostering innovation while minimizing risks.

A vigilant observer of the legal landscape, Eric proactively monitors litigation developments to advise clients on potential impacts and strategic responses. His deep understanding of intellectual property law is reflected in his contributions to various legal blogs and publications, where he offers insight into the latest trends and their broader implications in the field. Eric's authoritative commentary on intellectual property issues, including ITC investigations, is frequently sought by leading publications, underscoring his thought leadership in the industry.

A vigilant observer of the legal landscape, Eric proactively monitors litigation developments to advise clients on potential impacts and strategic responses. His deep understanding of intellectual property law is reflected in his contributions to various legal blogs and publications, where he offers insight into the latest trends and their broader implications in the field. Eric's authoritative commentary on intellectual property issues, including ITC investigations, is frequently sought by leading publications, underscoring his thought leadership in the industry.

Roger Williams University School of Law, J.D.

West Chester University, B.A. Political Science

Washington, D.C. Area

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Five new hires bring decades of experience, leadership and innovation</h2>



Merchant & Gould welcomes Daniel J. Pereira, Ph.D., John S. Kern, Eric W. Schweibenz, and Donald R. McPhail, as Partners and Alexander B. Englehart, as Of Counsel in its Washington D.C. Area office. The new additions will expand Merchant & Gould’s capabilities in handling International Trade Commission (ITC) cases, complex IP litigation, post-grant proceedings, patent prosecution, and strategic IP portfolio management, as well as increase its presence in Japan, China, Taiwan and Korea.



“We are continually investing in serving our client base worldwide, and this group will deepen our bench nationally and increase our existing presence in Japan, China, Taiwan and Korea,” said Heather Kliebenstein, Managing Director and Partner at Merchant & Gould. “Each of these experienced attorneys brings the right cross-culture experience and technical background that we want at Merchant & Gould.”



All five hires look forward to continuing their work in the D.C. area, serving clients worldwide. Merchant & Gould’s long-standing reputation for stability, creative legal solutions, collaboration and technologically advanced systems attracted the latest hires. 



“Transitioning to Merchant & Gould was the right move for us and our clients. We are excited to join such a dynamic firm that has superior technical strength, advanced internal systems and processes, extensive trial experience, and breadth of knowledge in all areas of intellectual property,” said Pereira. Dr. Pereira most recently served as the Managing Partner and previously led the Chemical Practice Group at Oblon. Mr. Kern and Mr. Schweibenz formerly led the Electrical/Mechanical and Litigation Practice Groups, respectively.



One of the oldest full-service intellectual property and trial law firms in America, Merchant & Gould evolves with technology, just like its client base. Through harnessing and pioneering advanced legal solutions, they have established themselves as an indispensable partner in delivering exceptional legal guidance and service to their clients.



“When we look to add new talent to our team at Merchant & Gould, we want to find people who have the right mindset — forward-thinking, collaborative and client-focused,” Kliebenstein shared. “Each of these attorneys embodies those values and will carry our firm’s legacy forward.”

Strategic Power Move: Merchant & Gould Lures Quintet of Highly-Experienced Attorneys to Supercharge DC Office and Accelerate Asia Expansion

Merchant & Gould is pleased to announce that the following attorneys have been included in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025.



Best Lawyers compiles lists of outstanding attorneys by conducting peer-reviewed surveys in which lawyers confidentially evaluate their colleagues. Since lawyers are not permitted to purchase their rankings or pay a fee to participate, a Best Lawyers listing is considered an unbiased honor.



Atlanta, GA



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Jeffrey D. Blake 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Patent Law</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>



Minneapolis, MN



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>John A. Clifford 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Advertising Law</li>



<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>



<li>Patent Law</li>



<li>Trademark Law</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Andrew S. Ehard 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>



<li>Trademark Law</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Thomas R. Johnson 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Advertising Law</li>



<li>Litigation – Patent</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Scott W. Johnston 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>



<li>Trademark Law</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Heather J. Kliebenstein 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Thomas J. Leach 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Brent E. Routman 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Advertising Law</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Christopher J. Schulte 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>



<li>Litigation – Patent</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>William D. Schultz 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Christopher J. Sorenson 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>



<li>Litigation – Patent</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Anthony R. Zeuli 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Copyright Law</li>



<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>



<li>Litigation – Patent</li>



<li>Patent Law</li>



<li>Trademark Law</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Rachel Zimmerman Scobie 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>



New York, NY



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Peter A. Gergely 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Intellectual Property</li>



<li>Litigation – Patent</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>



Alexandria, VA



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>John S. Kern 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Litigation – Patent</li>



<li>Patent Law</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Daniel J. Pereira 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Biotechnology and Life Sciences Practice</li>



<li>Patent Law</li>
</ul>
</li>



<li>Eric W. Schweibenz 
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Patent Law</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

Merchant & Gould Attorneys Recognized by Best Lawyers® in 2025 in America.

Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in <a href="https://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/23-1354.OPINION.1-2-2025_2444743.pdf">Honeywell International Inc., et al. v. 3G Licensing, S.A., Nos. 2023-1354, -1384, -1407 (Jan. 2, 2025)</a>, reversing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s final written decision declining to hold the challenged claims from U.S. Patent No. 7,319,718 (the “‘718 patent”) unpatentable as obvious.



Honeywell International Inc., Telit Cinterion Deutschland GmbH, and Sierra Wireless, ULC (collectively, “Honeywell”) filed a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) contending that the challenged claims of the ’718 patent are unpatentable as obvious over certain prior art references. The Board instituted the IPR and, in a final written decision, declined to hold any of the challenged claims unpatentable as obvious.



The Federal Circuit reversed. Writing for the majority, Judge Dyk stated that the Board improperly (1) based its conclusion of nonobviousness on its finding that the ’718 patent’s primary motivation was to “focus[ ] on system throughput” rather than to minimize root-mean-square error or bit error rate in contravention of well-established precedent such as the Supreme Court’s decision in KSR, which held that the motivation to modify a prior art reference to arrive at the claimed invention need not be the same motivation that the patentee had; (2) overlooked the unrebutted testimony from Honeywell’s expert witness, which contradicted the Board’s finding that Honeywell had not sufficiently shown that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the prior art; (3) conflated the relevant standards for obviousness and anticipation by giving weight to the fact that the Philips prior art reference did not explicitly propose swapping the last two bits of the last row of its basis sequence table; and (4) found that there was an insufficient motivation to modify the prior art because of uncertainty as to what is the “preferred” approach when well-settled Federal Circuit precedent “does not require that a particular combination must be the preferred, or the most desirable, combination described in the prior art in order to provide motivation for the current invention.” 



Judge Stoll dissented noting that although she agreed with Part III of the majority’s conclusion, this conclusion should result in vacating the Board’s decision versus reversing the Board’s decision. According to Judge Stoll, the majority’s decision was a “departure from the [CAFC’s] role as an appellate court.”

CAFC Reverses PTAB’s Final Written Decision Declining to Hold Challenged Claims Unpatentable as Obvious

Merchant is proud to announce that 17 of our attorneys have been recognized in the 2026 edition of Best Lawyers in America®, with an additional attorney honored in Ones to Watch by Best Lawyers.  



This recognition, based entirely on peer-reviewed evaluations, highlights our attorneys’ steadfast commitment to protecting their clients’ most valuable ideas.



Minneapolis, MN  



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>John A. Clifford  </li>



<li>Andrew S. Ehard  </li>



<li>Thomas R. Johnson  </li>



<li>Scott W. Johnston  </li>



<li>Heather J. Kliebenstein  </li>



<li>Thomas J. Leach</li>



<li>Brent E. Routman</li>



<li>Christopher J. Schulte  </li>



<li>William D. Schultz  </li>



<li>Christopher J. Sorenson  </li>



<li>Anthony R. Zeuli  </li>



<li>Rachel Zimmerman Scobie  </li>
</ul>



Atlanta, GA



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Jeffrey D. Blake</li>
</ul>



New York, NY  



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Peter A. Gergely  </li>
</ul>



Alexandria, VA  



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>John S. Kern  </li>



<li>Daniel J. Pereira  </li>



<li>Eric W. Schweibenz  </li>
</ul>



Ones to Watch  



Minneapolis, MN  



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Joseph W. Dubis, Ph.D.</li>
</ul>

Seventeen Merchant & Gould Attorneys Named Best Lawyers in America®2026; One Recognized in Ones to Watch

Litigation

ITC Section 337 Investigations

Post Grant Proceedings

Rhondalyn Dulic

Partner

Eric W. Schweibenz

American Bar Association 
Federal Bar Association 
Federal Circuit Bar Association 
ITC Trial Lawyers Association 
American Intellectual Property Law Association 
Japan-America Society of Rhode Island

Professional Affiliations

IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Professionals – DC Metro Area, 2025-2026 
Best Lawyers in America – Patent Law (2020-2027) 
Recognized by IP Stars by Managing IP (2022, 2025-2026) 
Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) Patent 1000: The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners, named to its list of the top 1000 patent attorneys in the world; recognized in the National – International Trade Commission (ITC) category for his ITC litigation work and in the Washington, D.C. Metro Area for his patent Litigation work (2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022)

Eric W. Schweibenz

Practices

Education

Admissions

Professional Affiliations

Awards & Recognition