
Nathan B. Webb, IP Attorney in Cleveland, Ohio
Over 17 years of legal practice · focused on IP, IP Licensing, and Patent
PartneratHahn Loeser & Parks LLP
Cleveland, OH
Practicing ip in Cleveland since 2009.
- 17+
- Years practicing
- 1
- Bar admission
Practices in
Are you Nathan B. Webb?
This profile was built from public bar records and is still unclaimed. Claim it free to control your photo, bio, and fees — and get client inquiries sent straight to you.
Quick answer
Nathan B. Webb is a partner based in Cleveland, OH. The practice focuses on IP, IP Licensing, and Patent. Nathan has over 17 years of legal experience. Currently practicing at Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP.
- Based in
- Cleveland, OH
- Experience
- over 17 years
- Known for
- IP · IP Licensing · Patent
- Handles IP, IP Licensing, and Patent matters from Cleveland, OH.
- Over 17 years of practice as a licensed attorney.
About Nathan B. Webb: Nathan B. Webb is a partner based in Cleveland, OH. The practice focuses on IP, IP Licensing, and Patent. Nathan has over 17 years of legal experience. Currently practicing at Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP.
Areas of practice
Nathan's practice areas in Cleveland
Nathan concentrates on ip, ip licensing, patent, trademark, and trade secrets. Each area below outlines the kind of case Nathan handles, typical outcomes to expect, and how the intake process starts.
IP
View other IP attorneys
IP Licensing
View other IP Licensing attorneys
Patent
View other Patent attorneys
Trademark
View other Trademark attorneys
Trade Secrets
View other Trade Secrets attorneys
IP cases in Cleveland, Ohio
Nathan takes ip matters in Cleveland, Ohio. Typical engagements include intake calls to scope the issue, review of any records or filings you already have, and a written strategy memo before Nathan agrees to represent you.
IP Licensing cases in Cleveland, Ohio
Nathan takes ip licensing matters in Cleveland, Ohio. Typical engagements include intake calls to scope the issue, review of any records or filings you already have, and a written strategy memo before Nathan agrees to represent you.
Patent cases in Cleveland, Ohio
Nathan takes patent matters in Cleveland, Ohio. Typical engagements include intake calls to scope the issue, review of any records or filings you already have, and a written strategy memo before Nathan agrees to represent you.
Trademark cases in Cleveland, Ohio
Nathan takes trademark matters in Cleveland, Ohio. Typical engagements include intake calls to scope the issue, review of any records or filings you already have, and a written strategy memo before Nathan agrees to represent you.
Trade Secrets cases in Cleveland, Ohio
Nathan takes trade secrets matters in Cleveland, Ohio. Typical engagements include intake calls to scope the issue, review of any records or filings you already have, and a written strategy memo before Nathan agrees to represent you.
Biography
Nathan B. Webb, ip attorney serving Cleveland
Nathan B. Webb is a partner based in Cleveland, OH. The practice focuses on IP, IP Licensing, and Patent. Nathan has over 17 years of legal experience. Currently practicing at Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP. Nathan works from Cleveland, Ohio and takes on ip matters across the region.
Nathan B. Webb focuses his practice in intellectual property litigation. He has experience representing clients in a wide variety of intellectual property disputes, including patent, trademark and copyright infringement lawsuits; domain-name and trade-secret litigation; and trademark opposition proceedings in both state and federal courts. He also advises clients on various pre-litigation matters, provides opinions of counsel on product clearance or patent infringement, and manages trademark and patent enforcement efforts. Nathan has extensive experience in intellectual property transactional matters, such as drafting patent and trademark licensing and assignment agreements, company patent procurement and protection polices, and non-competition and confidentiality agreements.
As a registered patent attorney, Nathan also has experience drafting and prosecuting patents in the mechanical, chemical and biological arts. Before becoming a patent attorney, he was a professor managing Washburn Law School's criminal appellate advocacy clinic and an attorney at the Kansas Appellate Defender Office.
Professional History
• Partner, Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP, 2016-present; Of Counsel, 2014-15; Associate, 2013-14
• Partner, Emerson Thomson Bennett, LLC, 2008-13
• Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Washburn University School of Law, 2004-06
• Assistant Appellate Defender, Kansas Appellate Defender Office, 2000-06
Personal
A former college athlete, Nathan's hobbies include basketball, biking and running; he also enjoys gardening, travel and spending time with his daughters.
Experience
• Sinclair-Allison v. Fifth Avenue Physician Services, et al. (Okla. Fed. D. Ct.). Represented plaintiff in pending infringement lawsuit covering patented business methods.
• Lecat's Ventriloscope v. University of New England (Maine Fed. D. Ct.). Served as lead counsel in pending patent infringement lawsuit on behalf of medical device company.
• NuVo Grand, LLC v. Oliver’s Products (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.). Represented plaintiff in false advertising and unfair competition lawsuit.
• The Shamrock Companies v. Prime Business Solution, et al. (Cuyahoga Court Common Pleas, Ohio) (2012). Successfully resisted efforts to obtain temporary restraining order in representation of defendants in unfair competition, tortious interference and trade secret misappropriation lawsuit.
• Vyapar Capital Market Partners v. Valmark Securities (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board). Represented trademark applicant in United States Patent and Trademark Office opposition proceedings.
• Delta Media Group v. Chartwell Realty Group, et al. (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.) (2012). Represented co-defendants in breach of contract and copyright infringement lawsuit.
• Volkswagen AG v. Vee Dub Parts Unlimited (Virginia Fed. D. Ct.) (2012). Served as lead counsel for California defendant in trademark infringement and cyber-squatting lawsuit.
• ABB v. WorkStations Express (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.) (2012). Represented defendant, an Ohio small business, against a multi-national corporation in unfair competition, tortuous interference with business relations and defamation lawsuit.
• Litco International v. Movers Specialty Services (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.) (2011). Served as expert and local counsel in patent and trademark infringement lawsuit involving washing machine transport devices.
• J4 Promotions v. Splash Dogs, LLC (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.) (2011). Served as expert co-counsel in copyright infringement, unfair competition, trade libel and tortious interference lawsuit between competitors in the sport of canine dog-jumping.
• Biltmore Exteriors v. Biltmore Restoration Group (Stark County Court Common Pleas, Ohio) (2011). Represented plaintiff in common law trademark and unfair competition lawsuit.
• O'Donovan & Associates, Inc. v. Hudson Insurance Company (Maryland Fed). D. Ct.) (2011). Represented plaintiff in lawsuit alleging violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
• Renewable Lubricants Inc. v. United Bio Lube (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.) (2010). Served as lead counsel for plaintiff in trademark infringement, unfair competition, cyber-squatting and defamation litigation.
• Heat Surge v. Twin Star International (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.) (2010). Represented defendant in an unfair competition, trade libel and trademark and trade dress infringement lawsuit.
• National Biological Corporation v. The Richmond Light Company (Ohio Fed. D. Ct.) (2010). Represented patent holder in infringement lawsuit which resulted in termination of sales of infringing products.
• Accenture Global Services, Ltd. v. Ascenture Hotel Group (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board) (2010). Represented trademark applicant in United States Patent and Trademark Office trademark opposition proceedings.
• Labnet v. Quintalone & Associates (Colo. Fed. D. Ct.) (2009). Represented federal trademark holder in trademark infringement and cyber-squatting lawsuit.
• Labnet v. Berry & Berry (Colo. Fed. D. Ct.) (2009). Represented client in trademark infringement and cyber-squatting lawsuit.
• Data-Basics v. Field Fusion (Cuyahoga Court Common Pleas, Ohio) (2009). Represented defendants in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit regarding tablet software applications.
• Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations v. Linglong Tire, Inc. (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board) (2009). Represented trademark applicant in United States Patent and Trademark Office trademark opposition proceedings.
• Labnet v. Brictson & Cohn (Colo. Fed. D. Ct.) (2008). Represented federal trademark holder in trademark infringement and cyber-squatting lawsuit resolved by entry of injunction and transfer of domain names.
• Labnet v. George Henderson Law (Colo. Fed. D. Ct.) (2008); George Henderson Law Corp. v. Labnet (Cal. Fed. D. Ct.) (2009). Represented plaintiff, and declaratory judgment defendant, in federal trademark infringement and cyber-squatting cases.
• Hypertherm, Inc. v. American Torch Tip (New Hamp). Fed. D. Ct.) (2008). Served as co-counsel for defendant in patent infringement lawsuit regarding plasma torch devices and components.
Publications & Speaking Engagements
USPTO Requires U.S. Licensed Attorney for Foreign Trademark Applicants and Registrants
July 23, 2019
The Power of PI: International Trademark Litigation Tactics, Preliminary Injunctions, and Other U.S. Trademark Enforcement Strategies
April 07, 2016
The Changing Landscape of Patent Litigation: How Expanded Post-Grant Review Proceedings, Federal Rules Changes, And Case Law Developments Are Impacting Patent Litigation and Prosecution Strategies
2016
"Evolving Standards for the Patentability of Life Sciences Inventions," Nathan B. Webb
July 02, 2015
Working with Nathan on a ip matter
Nathan B. Webb focuses his practice in intellectual property litigation. He has experience representing clients in a wide variety of intellectual property disputes, including patent, trademark and copyright infringement lawsuits; domain-name and trade-secret litigation; and trademark opposition proceedings in both state and federal courts. He also advises clients on various pre-litigation…
Clients Nathan works with
Nathan reviews new inquiries case-by-case for ip, ip licensing, and patent matters in Cleveland and the surrounding Ohio area.
Credentials
Credentials — where Nathan studied and practices
University of Kansas School of Law
J.D. · 2000
Friends University
B.A. History · 2006
Jurisdictions
Nathan's state bar admissions
Ohio U.S. Supreme Co
2009 · ACTIVE
Nathan studied at J.D. in University of Kansas School of Law and B.A. History in Friends University.
Law school and academic background
Nathan completed J.D. in University of Kansas School of Law and B.A. History in Friends University. Formal legal training is one signal of substantive knowledge — the day-to-day practice Nathan runs in Ohio is where that training gets applied to real client questions.
Locations
Nathan B. Webb's office in Cleveland
Nathan's primary office is at 200 Public Square, Suite 2800, Cleveland, OH, 44114. In-person meetings are by appointment; a phone intake usually comes first.
Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP
200 Public Square, Suite 2800
Cleveland, OH 44114
Open in Google MapsClient feedback
Client reviews of Nathan B. Webb
Nathan has not yet collected verified client reviews on LawyersListed. Reviews here are all from confirmed clients; anonymous ratings are moderated out.
No reviews yet
Only verified clients who have consulted with Nathan B. Webb can leave a review.
Schedule your consultationHiring guide
How to hire Nathan B. Webb — what to expect in your first consultation
Working with a new ip attorney should feel structured. Here's how the first two conversations with Nathan usually go, from the moment you request a consult to the day representation begins.
Consultation formats and pricing
Nathan charges for the initial consult. That fee is credited toward representation if you retain Nathan's office.
What to bring to your first meeting
Bring any documents you already have — police reports, medical records, filed pleadings, correspondence from an insurer, a copy of the contract at issue. If you're not sure, err on the side of bringing everything; Nathan will tell you what matters and what doesn't.
Questions to ask a ip attorney in Cleveland, Ohio
A short list to run through before you commit: How many ip matters have you handled in the last year? What's your fee structure? Who else in the office will work on this? What's your realistic estimate of timeline and range of outcomes? How do I reach you between meetings?
Fees & payment
Fees, payment methods, and consultation options for Nathan
Nathan discusses fees during intake so the arrangement fits the matter. Contingency, hourly, and flat-fee options are all common in ip practice — ask which fits.
Hourly rates, contingency fees, and flat-fee options
Every ip matter is priced differently. Simple document review might be a flat fee. Injury litigation is often contingency. Complex commercial disputes usually run hourly with a retainer. Nathan confirms the model in the engagement letter before any work starts.
Payment methods and payment plans
Nathan's office accepts standard payment methods. Ask about payment plans if the retainer is a stretch — many ip practices work with clients on structured schedules.
Frequently asked
Frequently asked questions about Nathan B. Webb
How much does it cost to hire Nathan for a ip case?
Cost depends on the type of matter, the fee model (contingency, flat, hourly), and how contested the case becomes. Nathan walks through the likely range during the consult so there are no surprises.
Does Nathan offer a free consultation?
Nathan charges for the initial consult; that fee is credited toward representation if you retain Nathan's office. Some ip attorneys offer free consults — check Nathan's current terms during booking.
How long do ip cases in Ohio typically take?
Simple ip matters can wrap in a few weeks; disputed cases can run 6–18 months from intake to resolution, longer if the matter goes to trial. Nathan gives a realistic estimate for your facts at the consult — vague answers here are a red flag.
Can Nathan take my case if I'm outside Cleveland?
Nathan is licensed in Ohio. Matters governed by Ohio law are the natural fit. Out-of-state matters are handled case-by-case, sometimes with local co-counsel. Ask during intake — Nathan will tell you if the case is a fit or refer you to someone closer to your court.
What should I bring to my first meeting with Nathan?
Bring every document that touches the dispute: contracts, correspondence, police or medical reports, filed pleadings, invoices, photographs, insurance letters. Also bring a written timeline of what happened, in your own words. Nathan will filter what matters — over-preparing at intake is always cheaper than needing a second meeting.
Is Nathan accepting new ip clients right now?
Nathan's intake status shifts week to week. Submit the form; the office will confirm availability or refer the matter out.
Areas served
IP attorneys serving Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati in Ohio
Nathan handles ip matters throughout Ohio. Each city below is a direct link into the search page for verified ip attorneys in that community.
More counsel
Other top-rated ip attorneys in Ohio
If Nathan's intake is full or the fit isn't right, these ip attorneys in Cleveland handle similar matters. Every profile below is verified and open to consultations.





