People / J. Andrew Lowes
Andrew Lowes

J. Andrew Lowes

Partner | Chair - Intellectual Property Department

Andrew Lowes, Chair of Haynes Boone’s Intellectual Property Department, focuses on intellectual property law across a variety of technical fields with a particular emphasis in medical devices, computer software and hardware, telecommunications, semiconductor devices, and mechanical equipment. He is heavily involved in post-grant proceedings before the USPTO, including ex parte reexamination and inter partes review proceedings brought by the firm on behalf of its clients. A number of these proceedings are related to concurrent litigation, and Andrew’s experience in this arena is invaluable in developing defensive strategies in litigation.

Andrew is also active in the Federal Circuit and has recently been recognized among Patexia’s 2021 ranking of the nation’s top lawyers appearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), which specializes in hearing patent appeals. He is ranked 26th among the top 100 best performing attorneys representing appellees in the federal circuit and 25th out of 100 overall.

In addition, Andrew represents several medical device companies and other high technology industries in strategic guidance on product clearance and intellectual property transactions, as well as patent procurement and intellectual property management.

Prior to attending law school, Andrew was a consultant in the nuclear power industry.

Show More
Expand All
  • Extensive involvement in patent office trials including counsel on related federal circuit appeals.
  • Developing intellectual property portfolios for start-up and later stage technology companies, including establishing and formulating patent procurement strategies, obtaining domestic and foreign patents, and negotiating and securing technology licenses and acquisition agreements.
  • Counseling regarding new and existing products and patent infringement issues, including patent validity, and the design and implementation of non-infringing alternatives to patented technology.
  • Advising on numerous M&A transactions ranging in size from a few million to more than a billion dollars in transaction value.
  • Assisting in the litigation of several patent cases including, Markman hearings and trials, along with concurrent patent office trials.
  • Texas Bar Association
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association, Special Committee on Mergers and Acquisitions
  • American Bar Association
  • Intellectual Property Owners Associations, U.S. Post-Grant Patent Office Practice Committee
  • Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America, Woodward/White, Inc., 2024
  • “Strategies for Strengthening your PTAB Trial Record for Appeal,” speaker, 22nd Annual Advanced Patent Law Institute, Austin, TX, November 3, 2017.
  • “Hot Issues in PTAB Trials: PTAB Procedural Developments and Impact of Ongoing Reform,” Moderator, 53rd Annual Conference on Intellectual Property Law, November 16, 2015.
  • “Hot Issues in PTAB Trials: Coordination with District Court Litigation,” Moderator, 53rd Annual Conference on Intellectual Property Law, November 16, 2015.
  • "IP Due Diligence in M&A Transactions," live webinar/teleconference presented by Strafford Publications, Inc., January 25, 2011.
  • "IP Domain: Marking Your Product - Drinking Cup Company's Defense Holds Water," co-author, Tarrant County Bar Association Bulletin, October, 2010.
  • "IP Due Diligence in the M&A Context," State Bar of Texas 23rd Annual Advanced Intellectual Property Law Course, Austin, TX, March 4-5, 2010.


J.D., Indiana University School of Law Bloomington, cum laude; Managing Editor, Federal Communications Law Journal

B.S., Electrical Engineering, University of Alabama



U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Mergers and the 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) Patent IPR Institution Time Bar
October 24, 2023

The below article was published in Westlaw Today. Andrew Lowes of Haynes Boone and Savannah Olmstead, 2023 summer associate at the firm, discuss considerations when navigating how prospective mergers affect existing and potential inter partes review proceedings. Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b), "[a]n inter partes review may not be instituted if the petition is filed more than 1 year after the date on w [...]