Elizabeth Hannah Rader is a graduate of Simon’s Rock College, Bryn Mawr College, and the University of Minnesota Law School. She started her legal career clerking for Circuit Judge Alvin A. Schall of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. After completing that clerkship, she clerked in the Eastern District of Virginia for Judge Leonie M. Brinkema. She went on to practice in large law firms.

While at times patent litigation kept her busy, her broader practice included copyright, trademark, and trade secret cases, as well as related litigation for technology clients. From 2002-2004, Elizabeth practiced as a residential fellow in the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. In that role, she assisted the Cyberlaw Clinic director in teaching and mentoring law students and young lawyers. She also litigated groundbreaking copyright cases involving the Constitution, fair use, and the public domain.

After completing her fellowship, Elizabeth returned to private practice, where her writing skills were immediately put to good use. The primary author of a number of Federal Circuit briefs, she has argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and the California Court of Appeal. She has also written and filed amicus briefs in several Supreme Court and Court of Appeals cases, pro bono on behalf of nonprofit organizations. Throughout her career, Elizabeth has done significant pro bono work. She continues to mentor younger lawyers and to advocate for diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.

I’d love to work with you. I have over thirty years of litigation experience, including two federal clerkships.

While you are busy developing business or arguing in court, I can:

• turn your outline or ideas into a fully developed draft brief
• tighten up a brief that’s too long – without giving up a single point
• rewrite a technical or abstract explanation to make it readable and easy to understand

...and much more.

Intellectual property litigation—patent, trademark, and copyright-related issues of competition—has been our primary area of practice since the early 1990s.  Much of Calliope Legal’s appellate representation involves intellectual property. Elizabeth Rader’s experience as a Federal Circuit law clerk gives us valuable insights into what Federal Circuit judges like and dislike in appellate briefs and arguments.

We pride ourselves on the ability to explain sophisticated technology that might otherwise be challenging to those unfamiliar with specific technologies. Our name is Greek but our explanations of technology won't be Greek to a judge.

Elizabeth has also represented parties in cases that presented diverse other legal issues, including civil liberties. The necessary skills—legal writing, meticulous attention to detail, and thorough preparation for oral argument—transfer across multiple areas of the law.

Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org., 590 U.S._ (April 27, 2020). We obtained a watershed ruling on behalf of a nonprofit organization that makes legal materials available online. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled, 5-4, that the annotations in the Official Code of Georgia, Annotated are unprotected by copyright under the edicts-of-government doctrine because they are works created by officials empowered to speak with the force of law. The majority reasoned that it is irrelevant that the annotations are not themselves legally binding. The high court's decision affirmed the Eleventh Circuit's unanimous decision in our client's favor.

uPI Semiconductor Corp. v. International Trade Comm’n, 767 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Represented a semiconductor chip design company in its successful appeal from an International Trade Commission determination concerning patents and trade secrets relating to chips used in video game consoles and similar consumer electronics.

Epistar Corp. v. International Trade Comm’n, 566 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Represented a chip manufacturer in an appeal from an International Trade Commission determinination involving patents directed to fabricating LEDS.

Beethoven.com LLC v. Librarian of Congress, 394 F.3d 939 (D.C. Cir. 2005). Represented music streaming services in an appeal from the Librarian's decision setting royalty rates and terms for compulsory licenses for webcasting music.

Calliope Legal authors amicus curiae briefs on behalf of nonprofit organizations we respect, admire, and support. We do so on a pro bono basis, at no cost to the nonprofit organization. An amicus curiae (friend of the court) is a non-party who assists the court by offering information, expertise, or insight bearing on the issues the case presents.

An effective amicus brief does not merely endorse or echo one party's points and arguments. Instead, it may introduce facts not in the trial court record. Or it may explain legal and policy ramifications of the court’s options for deciding the case. Considering diverse perspectives enriches the judicial decision-making process.

If you represent a progressive nonprofit organization and wish to submit an amicus brief in an important case on appeal, we would like to hear from you. If we can write your brief without sacrificing the quality of work we strive to provide for all our clients, and we agree that your participation as a friend of the court would be in the public interest, we can likely do so. Please feel free to reach out to us.

Knorr Bremse Systeme Fuer Nutzfaerzeuge GMBH v. Dana Corp. 383 F.3d 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (en banc). Authored and filed an amicus brief in the Federal Circuit on behalf of Public Patent Foundation urging that, with respect to willfulness of infringement, no adverse inference should be drawn because a defendant invokes attorney-client privilege to protect advice of counsel. Nor should an adverse inference be drawn where an accused infringer knew of the relevant patent but did not obtain independent legal advice. In a landmark ruling, the Federal Circuit agreed.

Brand X Internet Servs. v. Federal Commc'ns Comm'n, 345 F.3d 1120 (9th Cir. 2003). Authored and filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union concerning regulation of broadband internet service.

TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc., 532 U.S. 23 (2001). Authored and filed an amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) in support of the position that the owner of an expired patent cannot continue to protect the subject matter of that expired patent as trade dress; the patented feature enters the public domain when the patent expires. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court agreed, holding that a product feature that is functional cannot serve as a trademark, and a patented product feature is presumed to be functional.