top of page
Law Firm Reinvented. The future is now.
Klintworth & Rozenblat IP is an innovative intellectual property law firm comprising a team of top-notch attorneys representing some of the largest and most sophisticated clients in the world. The firm utilizes a reduced overhead structure and an all-star team of experienced, partner-level attorneys, hailing from some of the largest and most well-known law firms in the country, to provide clients with exceptional work product at reasonable rates. While the firm has a small firm feel providing its clients with close, personal attention, the firm has a national footprint with attorneys and staff located in cities around the country.  That's what we call Law Firm Reinvented!


Let us work for you.


Join our All-Star Team.


Learn about our firm.

#37 in Patents, #49 in Design Patents, and #52 in Trademarks! Klintworth and Rozenblat IP was ranked #37 among all patent firms in the USA for patent filings, #49 for Design Patent filings, and #52 for trademarks. Not bad for a small Midwestern firm that prides itself on quality.  We look forward to continuing to helping our clients and providing top notch service into the new decade. See the 2019 Toteboards for more info:  [February 4, 2020]
We moved to a new office. In 2016 Klintworth & Rozenblat IP moved its Chicago office to an exciting new location in the West Loop at 19 North Green Street. This newly remodeled 5,000 square foot office contains twelve lawyer’s offices and provides room for further expansion.  Feel free to contact us if you are ever in town and would like to visit. [July 1, 2016] 
Apple loses patent lawsuit to University of Wisconsin. Apple Inc could be facing up to $862 million in damages after a U.S. jury on Tuesday found the iPhone maker used technology owned by the University of Wisconsin-Madison's licensing arm without permission in chips found in many of its most popular devices. [October 13, 2015]
Obviousness: Despite KSR, Still Tough to Win in Court. In Ivera Medical v. Hospira (Fed. Cir. 2015), on summary judgment, the district court found Ivera’s asserted patent claims invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. On appeal, the Federal Circuit has reversed – finding that Ivera’s submitted expert testimony raised genuine issues of material fact, showing that it may be tough to win obviousness claims in court. [September 10, 2015]
Akamai v. Limelight: Federal Circuit Expands the Contours of Direct Infringement. The Federal Circuit in this case has expanded the contours of direct infringement to encompass two new forms of divided activity. [August 13, 2015]
bottom of page