Ready to Register?

MyLawCLE All-Access Pass

Best choice

Add the All-Access Pass and get this program —
plus 1,000+ live CLE programs every year.


All specialty & ethics credits included
38 practice areas
New sections: AI & the Law, Practice Management
100s of current and trending legal topics
Nationally recognized and highly experienced presenters

$395 / year — this program included
Register with the All-Access Pass

This program + 1,000+ CLE programs, all year

Or register for just this program

Live Video Broadcast

Live webinar of this one program.
$195 Register

On-Demand Video

Recorded access + self-study credit.
$195 Register

When Engineering Emails Become Plaintiff’s Exhibit A: Patent Willfulness Counseling for Product Companies

Engineer emails, Slack threads, and a missing or flawed opinion can turn a patent dispute into treble damages. Learn to build clearance and infringement opinions that credibly defeat willfulness, structure privilege architecture, train engineers, and deploy litigation-hold playbooks before suit is filed.

2026-10-23 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-10-23 12:00:00

2026-10-23 12:00:00

2h CLE Credits

2026-10-23 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-10-23 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-10-23 12:00:00

Over 1,000+ webinars

2026-10-23 12:00:00

Course Overview

The Willfulness Case Against Your Client Is Being Written Right Now — by Its Engineers

2026-10-23 12:00:00

Patent willfulness exposure is built long before a complaint is filed. Under the post-Halo and SRI v. Cisco framework, courts weigh the Read factors to decide whether to enhance damages. Recent decisions, including Provisur v. Weber, Columbia v. Gen Digital, Wonderland v. Evenflo, and Chief Judge Connolly’s Inari Medical order, frame how opinions of counsel fit into willfulness defenses.

The risk sits in everyday conduct. An engineer email becomes Exhibit A. An opinion with timing or quality gaps may not defeat willfulness. Relying on advice of counsel springs the privilege waiver trap. Mishandled notice letters invite willful-blindness exposure under Global-Tech. Generative AI tools and foreign affiliates open privilege failure modes (United States v. Heppner). Retention gaps in Slack, Teams, Jira, and GitHub create FRCP 37(e) spoliation risk. The ceiling is treble damages.

You leave with implementable work product: clearance protocols, opinion reliance documentation, and structural decisions around § 298 and opinion counsel. You also get privilege architecture, engineer training, patent triage, design-around documentation, and litigation-hold playbooks. This is judgment no AI tool supplies. It shows how to preserve privilege unless and until the company elects to rely on advice of counsel.

Format

CLE Credit

2h CLE Credits

Level

Intermediate

Length

2

Key topics that will be covered

01
Post-Halo Willfulness Exposure
How the post-Halo and SRI v. Cisco framework, and decisions such as Wonderland v. Evenflo, turn routine engineer emails into a plaintiff’s Exhibit A.
02
Opinions That Move Enhancement
How timing considerations, quality benchmarks, and the Read factors determine whether a clearance or infringement opinion credibly defeats willfulness or is disqualified.
03
Opinion Counsel Structure
How § 298 and the privilege waiver trap drive your structural decisions around opinion counsel and any election to rely on advice of counsel.
04
Privilege Architecture Failure Modes
How to build structural privilege protections that hold up against critical failure modes, including foreign affiliates and generative AI (United States v. Heppner).
05
Engineer Communication Protocols
How to run patent triage, design-around documentation, and engineer training that handle notice letters and avoid willful-blindness exposure (Global-Tech).
06
Retention and Litigation Holds
How to build litigation-hold playbooks and document-retention policies covering Slack, Teams, Jira, and GitHub that manage FRCP 37(e) spoliation risk.

Program schedule

clock 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm EST

Patent Clearance and Infringement Opinions That Actually Defeat Willfulness

This session examines what it takes to build a patent clearance or infringement opinion that may credibly defeat a willfulness claim under the post-Halo and SRI v. Cisco framework, covering timing considerations, quality benchmarks, the privilege waiver trap, and the Read factor framework courts use to decide whether to enhance damages. Attorneys will learn how opinion of counsel fit into willfulness defenses in light of recent decisions, including Provisur v. Weber, Columbia v. Gen Digital, Wonderland v. Evenflo, and Chief Judge Connolly’s Inari Medical order. Attendees leave with a practical understanding of how to counsel product company clients on clearance protocols, opinion reliance documentation, and the structural decisions that separate defensible good-faith conduct from exposure to treble damages.

Mandy SongMandy Song
clock 1:10 pm - 2:10 pm EST

Engineer Communication Protocols and Privilege Architecture for Product Companies

This session equips IP and product-company counsel with concrete, implementable protocols for managing engineer communications, structuring privilege architecture, and building litigation-hold playbooks that minimize willfulness exposure under the post-Halo standard and recent decisions such as Columbia v. Gen Digital and Wonderland v. Evenflo. Attendees will learn how to route patent encounters through privileged channels, handle notice letters and avoid willful-blindness exposure, and structure clearance review so that privilege is preserved unless and until the company elects to rely on advice of counsel. The session also covers privilege risks from generative AI tools and document-retention policies that cover Slack, Teams, Jira, and GitHub. Attorneys leave with actionable frameworks for engineer training, design-around documentation, and patent triage workflows that protect the company before litigation is ever filed.

Mandy SongMandy Song
Mandy Song

Mandy Song

Bayes PLLC

Mandy Song

Mandy Song

Bayes PLLC

Mandy Song is a first-chair patent litigator and the founding and managing partner of Bayes PLLC, where her practice spans legal opinions and counseling, pre-litigation diligence, and patent disputes in U.S. federal district courts, Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission, and PTAB post-grant proceedings. She has spoken on Mega Verdicts in U.S. Patent Litigation: Willful Infringement, Exceptionality & PTAB Challenges at Patent Litigation Masters 2022. An engineer by training, she works directly with inventors to build invention disclosures and counsels clients from startups to conglomerates with a global presence, drawing on nearly 20 years in patent practice.

Education & Credentials

Mandy holds a J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center. Her technical training includes a Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering and an M.S. in Biomedical Engineering, both from Duke University, and a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Tsinghua University.

She is admitted to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Northern District of Illinois, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. She is also a member of the District of Columbia Bar and the Virginia State Bar, and her firm profile lists admission to the U.S. Court of Appeals of Veteran Affairs.

Recognition & Leadership

Mandy has been recognized by American Super Lawyers magazine since 2020 and was twice named among the Top 30 Most Influential Women in IP, in 2019 and 2021. She sits on a committee of the PTAB Bar Association. She and Bayes PLLC completed the Minority Firm Incubator 2.0 hosted by Harrity & Harrity, LLP, a 42-week program for female- and minority-owned firms.

Professional Involvement

Mandy is a frequent CLE presenter on patent litigation and PTAB proceedings, due diligence for patent matters, industrial standards, and U.S. patent prosecution practice. Her litigation-focused programs include the willful infringement and exceptionality program at Patent Litigation Masters 2022, Venue and Exhaustion: Practical Effects of TC Heartland and Lexmark for a Finnegan webinar, and Extraterritorial Infringement under the U.S. Patent Law for the MySIPO Institute. She was an invited panelist at the 2026 Harvard Law School China Law Symposium, addressing cross-border disputes between China and the United States.

Beyond the courtroom, she taught legal writing as an adjunct professor at George Washington University Law School and has been an invited speaker on patent law at the Duke University Pratt School of Engineering. Her writing has appeared in IPWatchdog, Managing Intellectual Property, and China IP News, and she has presented Strafford webinars on after-final practice before the USPTO.

Experience

As lead litigation counsel, Mandy handles the full arc of a patent case, from pre-litigation due diligence through fact and expert discovery, depositions, claim construction, summary judgment, hearings, and trial. Representative matters on her firm profile span wearables, semiconductor memory, networked audio, vehicle electronics, and LED lighting, including Ouraring, Inc. v. RingConn LLC, et al. (ITC-337-TA-1398, smart rings), Sonos, Inc. v. Linkplay Technology Inc. (D. Del. 1:24-cv-00131, networked smart audio playback), PTAB proceedings in Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc., and BMW of North America, LLC v. Stragent, LLC, as well as a series of LED lighting cases involving Koninklijke Philips N.V. in the District of Massachusetts and other federal courts.

Her broader practice covers IP disputes arising on e-commerce platforms such as Amazon and at trade shows, trade secrets, export control, patent licensing and transactions, and global portfolio planning. She manages patent portfolio development for more than 100 clients and has personally drafted, filed, and prosecuted thousands of U.S. patent applications across technologies including artificial intelligence, semiconductors, telecommunications, robotics, and medical devices. Before founding Bayes PLLC, she practiced for more than a decade at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garret, and Dunner, LLP.
Mandy Song

Mandy Song

Bayes PLLC

Mandy Song is a first-chair patent litigator and the founding and managing partner of Bayes PLLC, where her practice spans legal opinions and counseling, pre-litigation diligence, and patent disputes in U.S. federal district courts, Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission, and PTAB post-grant proceedings. She has spoken on Mega Verdicts in U.S. Patent Litigation: Willful Infringement, Exceptionality & PTAB Challenges at Patent Litigation Masters 2022. An engineer by training, she works directly with inventors to build invention disclosures and counsels clients from startups to conglomerates with a global presence, drawing on nearly 20 years in patent practice.

Education & Credentials

Mandy holds a J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center. Her technical training includes a Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering and an M.S. in Biomedical Engineering, both from Duke University, and a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Tsinghua University.

She is admitted to practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Northern District of Illinois, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. She is also a member of the District of Columbia Bar and the Virginia State Bar, and her firm profile lists admission to the U.S. Court of Appeals of Veteran Affairs.

Recognition & Leadership

Mandy has been recognized by American Super Lawyers magazine since 2020 and was twice named among the Top 30 Most Influential Women in IP, in 2019 and 2021. She sits on a committee of the PTAB Bar Association. She and Bayes PLLC completed the Minority Firm Incubator 2.0 hosted by Harrity & Harrity, LLP, a 42-week program for female- and minority-owned firms.

Professional Involvement

Mandy is a frequent CLE presenter on patent litigation and PTAB proceedings, due diligence for patent matters, industrial standards, and U.S. patent prosecution practice. Her litigation-focused programs include the willful infringement and exceptionality program at Patent Litigation Masters 2022, Venue and Exhaustion: Practical Effects of TC Heartland and Lexmark for a Finnegan webinar, and Extraterritorial Infringement under the U.S. Patent Law for the MySIPO Institute. She was an invited panelist at the 2026 Harvard Law School China Law Symposium, addressing cross-border disputes between China and the United States.

Beyond the courtroom, she taught legal writing as an adjunct professor at George Washington University Law School and has been an invited speaker on patent law at the Duke University Pratt School of Engineering. Her writing has appeared in IPWatchdog, Managing Intellectual Property, and China IP News, and she has presented Strafford webinars on after-final practice before the USPTO.

Experience

As lead litigation counsel, Mandy handles the full arc of a patent case, from pre-litigation due diligence through fact and expert discovery, depositions, claim construction, summary judgment, hearings, and trial. Representative matters on her firm profile span wearables, semiconductor memory, networked audio, vehicle electronics, and LED lighting, including Ouraring, Inc. v. RingConn LLC, et al. (ITC-337-TA-1398, smart rings), Sonos, Inc. v. Linkplay Technology Inc. (D. Del. 1:24-cv-00131, networked smart audio playback), PTAB proceedings in Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc., and BMW of North America, LLC v. Stragent, LLC, as well as a series of LED lighting cases involving Koninklijke Philips N.V. in the District of Massachusetts and other federal courts.

Her broader practice covers IP disputes arising on e-commerce platforms such as Amazon and at trade shows, trade secrets, export control, patent licensing and transactions, and global portfolio planning. She manages patent portfolio development for more than 100 clients and has personally drafted, filed, and prosecuted thousands of U.S. patent applications across technologies including artificial intelligence, semiconductors, telecommunications, robotics, and medical devices. Before founding Bayes PLLC, she practiced for more than a decade at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garret, and Dunner, LLP.

Credits by state

AK2.0
AL2.0
AR2.0
AZ2.0
CA2.0
CO2.0
CT2.0
DC2.0
DE2.0
FL2.0
GA2.0
HI2.0
IA2.0
ID2.0
IL2.0
IN2.0
KS2.0
KY2.0
LA2.0
MA2.0
MD2.0
ME2.0
MI2.0
MN2.0
MO2.4
MS2.0
MT2.0
NC2.0
ND2.0
NE2.0
NH120.0
NJ2.0
NM2.0
NV2.0
NY2.0
OH2.0
OK2.5
OR2.0
PA2.0
RI2.5
SC2.0
SD2.0
TN2.0
TX2.0
UT2.0
VA2.0
VT2.0
WA2.0
WI2.0
WV2.4
WY2.0

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

10,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

MCLE Credits

Alabama
Pending
Alaska
Approved
Arizona
Approved
Arkansas
Approved
California
Approved
Colorado
Pending
Connecticut
Approved
Delaware
Pending
District of Columbia
No Required
Florida
Approved
Georgia
Pending
Hawaii
Approved
Idaho
Pending
Illinois
Pending
Indiana
Pending
Iowa
Pending
Kansas
Pending
Kentucky
Pending
Louisiana
Pending
Maine
Pending
Maryland
No Required
Massachusetts
No Required
Michigan
No Required
Minnesota
Pending
Mississippi
Pending
Missouri
Approved
Montana
Pending
Nebraska
Pending
Nevada
Pending
New Hampshire
Approved
New Jersey
Approved
New Mexico
Approved
New York
Approved
North Carolina
Pending
North Dakota
Approved
Ohio
Pending
Oklahoma
Pending
Oregon
Pending
Pennsylvania
Approved
Rhode Island
Pending
South Carolina
Pending
South Dakota
No Required
Tennessee
Pending
Texas
Approved
Utah
Pending
Vermont
Approved
Virginia
Not Eligible
Washington
Approved
West Virginia
Pending
Wisconsin
Pending
Wyoming
Pending

Alabama

Requirements

The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.  

Formats

  • Attorneys can earn unlimited “live” credit through live seminars, live webcasts, and co-sponsored locations with MyLAWCLE-Alabama approved programs
  • Attorneys are limited to 6 credits per compliance period of “online” programs through MyLAwCLE On-Demand programs