There are a vari­ety of rea­sons to apply for patents, includ­ing glory (being a patent holder), duty (insti­tu­tional require­ments or incen­tives), and commerce.

Glory and duty ought never be under-rated, but my prac­tice is based solely on the third leg of the triad – patent­ing for com­mer­cial rea­sons, i.e., to derive com­mer­cial value from inven­tions, whether that value is in terms of licens­ing fees, com­pany val­u­a­tion, lever­age for obtain­ing part­ners, or any of the many other rea­sons why patents are sought in a com­mer­cial context.


Thus the tagline “Arti­sanal Patent Port­fo­lio Ser­vices,” a phrase uncom­mon enough to deserve expla­na­tion. In brief, an “arti­san” is a craftsper­son who focuses on each unique end-product; thus an arti­san does not engage in mass pro­duc­tion. This is not to say that mass pro­duc­tion is to be frowned upon — the economies of scale make pos­si­ble the mod­ern world in a way that no num­ber of labor­ing arti­sans could equal.

But for some sit­u­a­tions there is no sub­sti­tut­ing for unique craft; and one such sit­u­a­tion is patent port­fo­lio devel­op­ment, where the suc­cess­ful com­mer­cial­iza­tion of an inven­tion depends upon a robust port­fo­lio, one that is care­fully tuned: to the tech­nol­ogy itself (cov­er­age for the “essence” of the inven­tion and each com­mer­cially valu­able imple­men­ta­tion of that essence); to the mar­ket needs for that tech­nol­ogy (a port­fo­lio that robustly cov­ers what the mar­ket will pay for, i.e., cov­er­age in both an “essence” and in a com­mer­cial con­text); and, to the impor­tance of the port­fo­lio as a show­case for investors, col­lab­o­ra­tors, and competitors.

That’s what I do in my prac­tice: arti­sanal patent­ing, arti­sanal port­fo­lio devel­op­ment. Craft­ing patents and a patent strat­egy around a par­tic­u­lar tech­nol­ogy, the mar­ket needs that tech­nol­ogy must sat­isfy in order to be com­mer­cially valu­able, and the need for a port­fo­lio that demon­strates (and, ide­ally, trum­pets) to investors and com­peti­tors alike that there’s either value in the com­pany or a big stick that it car­ries that must be dealt with.


If what I do is arti­sanal in broad scope, what tal­ents do I bring to the table that dif­fer­en­ti­ate me in the per­for­mance of my craft; in other words, why me? There are at least three rea­sons I’d pro­pose: arti­sanal is gen­er­ally not obtain­able in large enti­ties (the down­side of at-scale pro­duc­tion is that arti­sanal work can’t be per­formed eas­ily in a high-throughput sit­u­a­tion); my tech­ni­cal skills and expe­ri­ence are directed to arti­sanal sit­u­a­tions, where every dol­lar is crit­i­cal to the final out­come; and, I’ve sup­ple­mented those skills with about 10 years of patent­ing search­ing expe­ri­ence and also with some rather sophis­ti­cated search tools I’ve developed.

If that sounds like the kind of approach you’re look­ing for, please con­tact me at ascheinman@scheinmanlaw.com. Before con­tact­ing me, please remem­ber not to send con­fi­den­tial (non-public) infor­ma­tion in your email, and that merely con­tact­ing me does not cre­ate an attorney-client rela­tion­ship. Please read the Dis­claimer Page before con­tact­ing me.

Andrew Schein­man

Andrew Schein­man, Ph.D., J.D., is the founder and Prin­ci­pal of Schein­man Law. Andrew is well-educated1, and has exten­sive expe­ri­ence in the com­mer­cial­iza­tion of new tech­nolo­gies, both as a Part­ner prac­tic­ing patent law2, and from his involve­ment as founder and offi­cer in a num­ber of start-up com­pa­nies3. Andrew has worked as a patent attor­ney in a wide vari­ety of set­tings4, and focuses on IP devel­op­ment specif­i­cally as a tool for com­mer­cial advance­ment. Andrew has been respon­si­ble for crit­i­cal IP in a wide vari­ety of tech­nol­ogy areas5. He is the recip­i­ent of numer­ous train­ing grants, schol­ar­ships and awards, and has pub­lished and spo­ken exten­sively on the rela­tion­ship between IP land­scape analy­ses and other tools for strate­gic IP assessment/development and suc­cess­ful commercialization.

Andrew is licensed to prac­tice before the United States Patent and Trade­mark Office, and is licensed at the state level in North Carolina.

  1. B.S, Bio­chem­istry, Uni­ver­sity of Illi­nois at Urbana; Ph.D., Biology/Molecular Biol­ogy, Uni­ver­sity of Cal­i­for­nia at Los Ange­les; Post-doctoral work in mol­e­c­u­lar evo­lu­tion (UCLA) and gene ther­apy (Uni­ver­sity of Cal­i­for­nia San Diego); J.D., The Cal­i­for­nia West­ern School of Law, San Diego. []
  2. He spe­cial­izes in strate­gic IP devel­op­ment using advanced patent land­scap­ing tools, data­base analy­ses and tech­nol­ogy sur­vey meth­ods, includ­ing pro­pri­ety meth­ods he has devel­oped specif­i­cally for these pur­poses over his ten plus years of work­ing in the field. []
  3. Andrew co-founded PetMed, a start-up com­pany to pro­duce hypoal­ler­genic feldI-knockout cats, and cur­rently serves as Chief Sci­en­tist for Nexus iSR, a telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions com­pany. []
  4. Includ­ing bou­tique and medium-sized law firms as well as work­ing as a solo prac­ti­tioner. As part of his work he has trav­eled inter­na­tion­ally, most mem­o­rably to write patents for The Chi­nese National Human Genome Cen­ter and The Harbin Vet­eri­nary Insti­tute on the SARS virus, which he pre­pared after three weeks of meet­ings with the inven­tors in Shang­hai. []
  5. For exam­ple, SARS screen­ing, bio-defense, laser alter­ation of mate­ri­als, spec­troscopy, mate­ri­als sci­ences, and spe­cific aspects of telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions. []