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.

Lisa Tittemore is a partner in Merchant’s Boston office, where she brings decades of experience as a trial lawyer and strategic advisor in high-stakes intellectual property disputes. She has served as lead counsel in patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret litigation across federal courts nationwide, and advises clients ranging from global pharmaceutical and technology companies to emerging brands. Lisa’s practice blends litigation leadership with proactive IP portfolio strategy, helping clients build and protect their most valuable intangible assets.

core/paragraph

Lisa Tittemore is a partner in Merchant’s Boston office, where she brings decades of experience as a trial lawyer and strategic advisor in high-stakes intellectual property disputes. She has served as lead counsel in patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret litigation across federal courts nationwide, and advises clients ranging from global pharmaceutical and technology companies to emerging brands. Lisa’s practice blends litigation leadership with proactive IP portfolio strategy, helping clients build and protect their most valuable intangible assets.

Lisa’s litigation record includes successfully defending and asserting rights in complex IP disputes involving cutting-edge technologies and global markets. She has represented clients in proceedings before the U.S. District Courts, the Federal Circuit, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Her recent wins include securing a jury verdict and permanent injunction in a trade secret case, and defeating patent claims at the motion stage in multiple federal jurisdictions. She regularly advises clients on trademark portfolio development, enforcement, and pharmaceutical brand strategy, both in the U.S. and internationally. Lisa is a trusted advisor to whom clients turn when they need help whether to protect or secure rights or to defend against claims by others.

Lisa’s litigation record includes successfully defending and asserting rights in complex IP disputes involving cutting-edge technologies and global markets. She has represented clients in proceedings before the U.S. District Courts, the Federal Circuit, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Her recent wins include securing a jury verdict and permanent injunction in a trade secret case, and defeating patent claims at the motion stage in multiple federal jurisdictions. She regularly advises clients on trademark portfolio development, enforcement, and pharmaceutical brand strategy, both in the U.S. and internationally. Lisa is a trusted advisor to whom clients turn when they need help whether to protect or secure rights or to defend against claims by others.

Beyond her practice, Lisa is an active leader in legal and civic communities. She has served as President of the Federal Bar Association’s Massachusetts Chapter and led mentoring initiatives through the Women’s Bar Association.&nbsp; She is a member of the Boston Bar Association’s Law Firm Leadership Task Force and is Vice-Chair of the American Intellectual Property Law Association’s Amicus Committee. Lisa is also a longtime advocate for pro bono service, including legal support for GoodWeave, whose founder was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Lisa is a member of the Boston Museum of Science Board of Advisors.&nbsp; She regularly publishes on intellectual property topics.

Beyond her practice, Lisa is an active leader in legal and civic communities. She has served as President of the Federal Bar Association’s Massachusetts Chapter and led mentoring initiatives through the Women’s Bar Association.&nbsp; She is a member of the Boston Bar Association’s Law Firm Leadership Task Force and is Vice-Chair of the American Intellectual Property Law Association’s Amicus Committee. Lisa is also a longtime advocate for pro bono service, including legal support for GoodWeave, whose founder was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Lisa is a member of the Boston Museum of Science Board of Advisors.&nbsp; She regularly publishes on intellectual property topics.

Lisa has been widely recognized for her excellence and leadership in IP law. She has been named Lawyer of the Year for Trademark Law by Best Lawyers in America®, ranked in the WTR 1000 for both enforcement and prosecution, and honored by Chambers USA as a top intellectual property practitioner. She has also been included in Massachusetts Super Lawyers® top 50 New England Lawyers list, and Top Women of Law Circle of Excellence by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.

Lisa has been widely recognized for her excellence and leadership in IP law. She has been named Lawyer of the Year for Trademark Law by Best Lawyers in America®, ranked in the WTR 1000 for both enforcement and prosecution, and honored by Chambers USA as a top intellectual property practitioner. She has also been included in Massachusetts Super Lawyers® top 50 New England Lawyers list, and Top Women of Law Circle of Excellence by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.

American University - Washington College of Law, J.D., summa cum laude

Tufts University, B.A. International Relations, cum laude

Boston

Merchant & Gould, a premier intellectual property law firm, has opened an office in Boston, expanding the firm’s depth and breadth of experience into an important technology hub. This expansion brings a team of 13 highly regarded attorneys from the Sunstein law firm, a decades-old, well-known Boston IP boutique. The group brings substantial experience in Boston’s innovation ecosystem and further strengthens Merchant’s litigation, patent prosecution, and trademark practices.



“Boston is a natural fit for Merchant, as our strengths in life sciences and advanced technology and our 125-year history of protecting innovation are well-suited to the area’s technology, research, and venture capital communities,” said Heather Kliebenstein, Merchant’s Managing Partner. “Merchant’s presence in Boston enables closer collaboration with innovators across the region, supporting them at the earliest stages of development with a large bench of attorneys having deep technical and trial capabilities, a high degree of responsiveness, and close strategic coordination.”



The Boston office will be led by Office Managing Partner Kerry Timbers, an accomplished first-chair trial lawyer whose experience includes jury trials and arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The team also includes widely respected IP leader Bruce Sunstein and first-chair trial lawyer Lisa Tittemore. “Joining Merchant strengthens our client service by improving the breadth and depth of resources available to them,” said Sunstein. “Merchant’s deep technical bench and long history as a premier intellectual property and trial firm allow us to deliver even stronger outcomes.”



“Our decision to join Merchant was driven by a shared vision of attentive service and the opportunity to provide clients broader support,” said Timbers. “The firm’s national platform, combined with our team’s strengths, particularly in high-growth sectors such as biotechnology and software, creates a powerful synergy that benefits clients at every stage of the innovation lifecycle.”  



Merchant has experienced rapid growth in the last two years, adding over 50 attorneys and professionals, doubling the size of its Washington, D.C. office, and opening an office in Los Angeles. As one of the largest law firms in the nation dedicated exclusively to intellectual property, Merchant has a deep bench of attorneys, patent agents, scientists, and other professionals who handle some of the most complex IP challenges facing companies worldwide.

Merchant & Gould Opens Boston Office, Strengthening Its Depth and Breadth

Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in<a href="https://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/25-1427.OPINION.6-23-2026_2712960.pdf"> Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Pfizer Inc., No. 2025-1427 (June 23, 2026)</a>, affirming a district court’s grant of summary judgment that, because a specific claim term of Enanta’s U.S. Patent No. 11,358,953 was not supported by Enanta’s disclosure in an earlier provisional application, all claims of the ’953 patent are invalid as anticipated by Pfizer’s intervening public disclosure.



In its opinion, the Federal Circuit explained what the case is not, namely, it is not a standard written description case, nor is it a standard case regarding the correction of errors in issued patents. The decision noted the following relevant facts:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>On July 20, 2020, Enanta filed U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/054,048, which included a definition that referenced “—NHC(O)—C2-C12-alkyl.” </li>



<li>On April 6, 2021, Pfizer publicly disclosed the active ingredient in Paxlovid, which contains a one-carbon alkyl group. </li>



<li>On July 9, 2021, Enanta realized that the ’048 provisional contained a typographical error and that the “C2” should have been “C1.”</li>



<li>On July 19, 2021, Enanta filed a non-provisional application listing the relevant substituent as “—NHC(O)—C1-C12-alkyl” rather than “—NHC(O)—C2-C12-alkyl,” which carried through several continuations to the ’953 patent. </li>



<li>In June 2022, Enanta sued Pfizer, alleging that Paxlovid infringed the ’953 patent. </li>
</ul>



At the district court, Pfizer had argued that the ’953 patent could not claim priority to the ’048 provisional because the provisional did not support the claimed one-carbon alkyl group. Enanta countered that the provisional’s “C2” was an obvious typographical error that should have read “C1,” so correcting it added no new matter. The district court concluded that the ’953 patent was not entitled to the ’048 provisional’s filing date, and therefore granted summary judgment of invalidity.



On appeal, the Federal Circuit noted that while the district court had focused on its power to correct a purported typographical error in the provisional application, the proper question is whether there was a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the provisional application provided sufficient written description support for the invention claimed in the ’953 patent. The Court discounted Enanta’s expert testimony regarding the alleged typographical error, concluding there was no genuine dispute of material fact. The Court held that, “C2 is simply different from C1,” and the one-carbon alkyl group “was simply not disclosed in the ’048 provisional.”



Coauthored by Lisa Tittemore and Payton Remick

C2 is Not C1: Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidity in Paxlovid Patent Dispute

Litigation

Nicole Andrade

Partner

Lisa M. Tittemore

Selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America©, 2017-2027
WTR Global Leaders List 2026

Lisa M. Tittemore

Practices

Education

Awards & Recognition