Jonathan Nikkila, a litigator located in Dickinson Wright’s Ann Arbor office, focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation including patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret law. He has represented clients before both federal district courts throughout the country and in investigations before the International Trade Commission, and has extensive experience handling all aspects of pretrial discovery, motion practice, and trial preparation.
Jonathan is a registered patent attorney, admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. In addition to handling patent prosecution spanning a number of different technical fields, Jonathan also has experience managing both sides of post-grant patent proceedings for his clients. He has also prepared and defended multiple petitions for inter partes and covered business method review.
Education & Credentials
Education
University of Michigan Law School
J.D.- Intellectual Property Students Association
University of Michigan
B.S., Chemistry- with distinction
Bar Admission
Acknowledgements
- “Rising Star,” Michigan Super Lawyers, Intellectual Property, 2017-2020
Prominent Assignments
- Inland Diamond Products Co. v. Cherry Optical Inc.: Representing Inland Diamond Products in a patent infringement matter. In a precedentialopinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s summary judgment and remanded the case to trial. The Federal Circuit found that factual findings from Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings do not preclude litigation in a district court because the “preponderance of the evidence” standard is lower in IPRs, while district courts require the “clear and convincing” standard of proof to show invalidity.Case No. 2024-1106 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 15, 2025)
- Eagle Harbor Holdings/Medius v. Ford Motor Company (Jury Trial – W.D. Washington): Defended Ford in patent infringement trial in which plaintiff was asserting several patents against Ford’s SYNC infotainment system, and Ford’s automatic parking system. Plaintiffs sought damages of $250 million. Jury found patents not infringed, and awarded no damages to plaintiff. Jury also found that plaintiffs had misappropriated Ford trade secrets. Case No. 3-11-cv-05503
Professional Involvement
- State Bar of Michigan
- Michigan Intellectual Property Law Association
Court Admissions
- Supreme Court of the State of Michigan
- United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan