Margaret E. Ives


t 617-248-4907   f 617-248-4000

Meg Ives is a practical, business-minded litigator with more than ten years of experience representing leading technology and life sciences corporations in patent infringement and trade secret litigation in the federal courts.

Ms. Ives is a Massachusetts Super Lawyer.

Practice Focus

Intellectual Property Litigation:  patent and trade secret litigation and licensing disputes on behalf of software and hardware developers, telecommunications and internet service providers and biotechnology companies.

Complex Commercial Litigation:  complex business litigation involving contract disputes, business torts, securities litigation and government investigations for public and private corporations and financial institutions.

Representative Engagements

  • Counsel to Celgene in breach of contract litigation regarding exclusive license agreement related to Revlimid® and Pomalyst®.
    Children’s Medical Center Corporation v. Celgene Corporation, D Mass
  • Counsel to John Hancock in patent infringement litigation involving patents directed to systems and methods for providing users with option to send emails securely.
    DataMotion v. Hancock, ED Tex
  • Counsel to FrontPoint in patent infringement litigation regarding portable motion detection systems.
    Script Security v. FrontPoint, ED Tex
  • Counsel to CPI in patent infringement litigation involving patents directed to systems and methods for creating personalized consumer products.
    Rothschild Connected Devices Innovation v. CPI Security, ED Tex
  • Counsel to NetBrain in patent infringement litigation related to network mapping software.  
    Versata v. NetBrain, D Del
  • Counsel to FMR in patent infringement litigation involving patents directed to systems for direct mail marketing.
    Phoenix Licensing v. Fidelity, ED Tex
  • Counsel to Akamai in patent infringement litigation regarding flash media server. Afluo v. Akamai, D Del
  • Counsel to multiple defendant car rental companies in patent infringement litigation involving patents generally directed to enabling transactions on the Internet. 
    Pi-Net v. Avis, Budget, Dollar, Hertz, CD Cal
  • Counsel to Defendant accused of infringing patents directed to remote patient monitoring devices. 
    MyHealth, Inc. v. Tunstall Healthcare, ED Tex
  • Counsel to Hewlett-Packard in patent infringement litigation involving power management in personal computers.
    St. Clair Intellectual Property Associates v. Hewlett-Packard, D Del
  • Counsel to Defendant manufacturer in patent infringement litigation regarding reusable lancet designed for testing blood glucose levels. 
    Stat Medical Devices Inc. v. Facet Technologies, LLC, et al. D Del
  • Counsel to AvePoint in action for alleged trade secret misappropriation and contract breaches related to database management software. 
    AvePoint v. Janalent, D NJ

Publications and Presentations

  • "Apotex Sets Stage For Next Fed. Circ. BPCIA Dispute,” author, IP Law360, October 2015.
  • “How Bowman V. Monsanto May Wreak Havoc On Biotechnology,” co-author, Life Sciences Law360, April 2013.
  • “Strategies for Fighting Global Trade Secret Theft,” co-author, IP Law360, September 2012.
  • “Avoiding Trade Secret Litigation in the Life Sciences,” co-author, IP Law360, August 2012.
  • “Preempting Patent Litigation With 3rd-Party Submissions,” co-author, IP Law360, February 2012.
  • “In the Wake of Bilski,” co-author, Law360, June 2009.  

Professional and Community Involvement

Ms. Ives is a member of the Boston Bar Association. She is also on the Board of Directors of Pernet Family Health Services in Worcester, Massachusetts.




Thank you for reaching out to contact Choate. Before you send your message, we wanted to make sure you are aware of the following. Please do not send any confidential information in response to this link. Sending an e-mail to Choate does not give rise to an attorney-client relationship, and will not be deemed to disqualify Choate from undertaking any engagement for a current or future client.  Before any attorney-client engagement may be formed, Choate will need to check for possible conflicts of interest, you will need to consider whether you wish to retain Choate as counsel, and we will need to consider whether we wish to accept the potential engagement. In the meantime, Choate reserves the right to represent parties with interests adverse to you.