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.

Payton Remick is a patent agent assisting her clients at Merchant with the patent prosecution process. She helps ensure that ownership of the hard work her clients put into their new products is protected. 

core/paragraph

Payton Remick is a patent agent assisting her clients at Merchant with the patent prosecution process. She helps ensure that ownership of the hard work her clients put into their new products is protected.

With unbridled curiosity and a drive to perform at her best, Peyton delivers exceptional service and guidance to her clients.&nbsp;

With unbridled curiosity and a drive to perform at her best, Peyton delivers exceptional service and guidance to her clients.&nbsp;

A Love for Helping Clients and a Passion for Innovation&nbsp;

core/heading

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">A Love for Helping Clients and a Passion for Innovation&nbsp;</h2>

Whether preparing patent applications or working on patent prosecution, Payton approaches each client with the desire to help and an eagerness to learn.&nbsp;

Whether preparing patent applications or working on patent prosecution, Payton approaches each client with the desire to help and an eagerness to learn.&nbsp;

Payton spends time not only learning about the patent issues her clients are dealing with but also getting to know them as people. With a curiosity-driven passion for new technological advancements, Payton dives headfirst into research to ensure the best outcome for her client's patent.&nbsp;

Payton spends time not only learning about the patent issues her clients are dealing with but also getting to know them as people. With a curiosity-driven passion for new technological advancements, Payton dives headfirst into research to ensure the best outcome for her client's patent.&nbsp;

Because of her person-first approach, Payton's clients are always confident that their patent needs are in good hands.&nbsp;

Because of her person-first approach, Payton's clients are always confident that their patent needs are in good hands.&nbsp;

A Professional and Determined Work Ethic&nbsp;

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">A Professional and Determined Work Ethic&nbsp;</h2>

During her time in college, Payton was an NCAA Division 1 swimmer. This experience taught her to approach each new challenge with perseverance and resolve. This focused work ethic has allowed Payton to thrive in the world of patent law.&nbsp;

During her time in college, Payton was an NCAA Division 1 swimmer. This experience taught her to approach each new challenge with perseverance and resolve. This focused work ethic has allowed Payton to thrive in the world of patent law.&nbsp;

When a client comes to Payton, they’ll get a patent agent who has the work ethic to really get into the weeds of a problem, and she’ll only stop once her client is happy with the result.&nbsp;

When a client comes to Payton, they’ll get a patent agent who has the work ethic to really get into the weeds of a problem, and she’ll only stop once her client is happy with the result.&nbsp;

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Getting to Know Payton&nbsp;</h2>

Born and raised in the Atlanta metropolitan area, Payton is thrilled to work locally at the Atlanta office of Merchant. 

Born and raised in the Atlanta metropolitan area, Payton is thrilled to work locally at the Atlanta office of Merchant.

When Payton is not working, she’s taking care of her awesome Bengal leopard cat. She also enjoys doing anything outdoors, including going to the beach and reading mystery and thriller novels.

When Payton is not working, she’s taking care of her awesome Bengal leopard cat. She also enjoys doing anything outdoors, including going to the beach and reading mystery and thriller novels.

Kennesaw State University, B.S. Chemistry, 

Atlanta

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

Payton Li Remick

A Love for Helping Clients and a Passion for Innovation

A Professional and Determined Work Ethic

Getting to Know Payton

Practices

Education

Admissions