Michael S. Borella is Co-Chair of MBHB’s Artificial Intelligence Practice Group and Chair of the firm’s Software and Business Methods Practice Group.

Dr. Borella leverages his knowledge of complex software to help his clients – from individual inventors and global technology companies – solve intellectual property challenges and build and manage patent portfolios. Dr. Borella is a named inventor on more than 70 U.S. patent applications and has drafted or been involved in the prosecution of hundreds of patents in the U.S. and around the world. Clients also seek Dr. Borella’s counsel on patent eligibility, validity, infringement, patentability analyses and litigation matters.

With a doctorate in computer science, he has expertise in a wide variety of technologies, including networking, cloud computing, enterprise software, machine learning and robotics.

Prior to joining MBHB, Dr. Borella spent more than a decade in the software industry, where he worked on wireless data gateways, voice-over-IP technologies, and mobile application development. He has authored dozens of academic and technical papers related to networking, telecommunications and computer science. His research on the self-similar (fractal) nature of network latency and what it means to users has been particularly well-cited over the last two decades.

Dr. Borella writes frequently about intellectual property matters and is a regular contributor to Patent Docs, a website featuring news and commentary on patent law. He is a sought-after speaker, particularly in the area of patent eligibility.

  • J.D., Chicago-Kent College of Law,

    Magna Cum Laude

  • Ph.D., University of California,

    Computer Science

  • M.S., University of California,

    Computer Science

  • B.S., Clarkson University,

    Computer Science and Technical Communications, With Distinction

Bar Admissions
  • Illinois
  • U.S. Patent & Trademark Office


  • IAM Patent 1000
  • Best Lawyers in America (2023-2024)


  • Developed and carried out a large-scale patenting program for a multibillion-dollar enterprise networking company.
  • Conducted freedom to operate and patentability analyses for several software companies.
  • Advised dozens of software startup companies regarding their patent and trademark portfolios.
  • Won victories for his clients in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
  • Prepared and prosecuted patent applications directed to wireless communications systems, networks, and protocols for a Fortune 100 communications service provider.
  • Represented a global telecommunications operator in U.S. litigation matters involving patents directed to Internet telephony, security, and network management.
  • Managed a worldwide patent prosecution portfolio for a company specializing in software, cloud computing, and mechanical products.
  • Successfully overcame numerous patentable-subject-matter rejections from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Published Articles

M. Borella, “Gree, Inc. v. Supercell Oy (Fed. Cir. 2020),” Wolters Kluwer IP Litigator, January / February 2021, pp. 13-15, 2021.

M. Borella, “Food Allergies in Public Schools: Toward a Model Code,” Chicago-Kent Law Review, vol. 85, iss. 7, pp. 761-790, 2010.

M. Borella, “Lawful Packet Data Intercept for CDMA Wireless Networks,” Wireless Security Perspectives, pp. 3-7, 2003.

M. Borella, “On Estimating Long Range Dependence of Network Delay,” International Journal of Chaos Theory and Applications, vol. 6, iss. 4, 2001.

M. Borella, “Measurement and Interpretation of Internet Packet Loss,” Journal of Communications and Networking, vol. 2, iss. 2, pp. 93-102, 2000.

M. Borella, “Source Models of Network Game Traffic,” Computer Communications, vol. 23, iss. 4, pp. 403-410, 2000.

Patent Docs

The following publications include links to the Patent Docs weblog, a site focusing on patent law news.

USPTO Delays Transition to DOCX (Again) (Jan. 2, 2023)

In re Smith (Fed. Cir. 2022) (Sept. 15, 2022)

Think Twice About Appealing a § 101 Rejection to the PTAB (Sept. 13, 2022)

Silly § 102 Tricks (Sept. 11, 2022)

The EFF is Patently Wrong (Aug. 24, 2022)

Senator Tillis Proposes Patent Eligibility Reform (Again) (Aug. 3, 2022)

Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Netflix, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022) (July 31, 2022)

ClearOne, Inc. v. Shure Acquisition Holdings, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022) (July 21, 2022)

LG Electronics v. Immervision, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022) (July 17, 2022)

The Compelling Implications of Using a Blockchain to Record and Verify Patent Assignments (July 4, 2022)

The Supreme Court Sidesteps America’s Patent Eligibility Crisis (June 30, 2022)

A Few Things that USPTO Could Do to Simplify Patent Prosecution (June 12, 2022)

Eight Patent Examination Annoyances and How to Respond to Them (May 1, 2022)

Before You Complain About So-Called Bad Patents, Read This (April 17, 2022)

Repifi Vendor Logistics, Inc. v. Intellicentrics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022) (Mar. 23, 2022)

Mentone Solutions LLC v. Digi International Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021) (Feb. 8, 2022)

USPTO Announces Deferred Subject Matter Eligibility Response Pilot Program (January 6, 2022)

CosmoKey Solutions GmbH v. Duo Security LLC (Fed. Cir. 2021) (October 5, 2021)

The Federal Circuit Addresses Commercial Success (August 29, 2021)

MyMail, Ltd. v. ooVoo, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2021) (August 22, 2021)

On the Nature of Prior Art in the 35 U.S.C. § 101 Inquiry (August 10, 2021)

Sensormatic Electronics, LLC v. Wyze Labs, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021) (July 26, 2021)

Senate Passes the Endless Frontier Act (June 21, 2021)

Yu v. Apple (Fed. Cir. 2021) (June 13, 2021)

Supreme Court Requests View of Solicitor General in American Axle v. Neapco (May 3, 2021)

Could Alice Be Used to Invalidate Diehr? Of Course It Could (April 20, 2021)

Raytheon Technologies Corp. v. General Electric Co. (Fed. Cir. 2021) (April 18, 2021)

VLSI Technology, LLC v. Intel Corp. (W.D. Texas 2021) (March 21, 2021)

On the Patent Eligibility of Information Processing (March 15, 2021)

Infinity Computer Products, Inc. v. Oki Data Americas, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021) (February 23, 2021)

Simio, LLC v. FlexSim Software Products, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020) (December 29, 2020)

Adaptive Streaming Inc. v. Netflix, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020) (December 22, 2020)

Gree, Inc. v. Supercell Oy (Fed. Cir. 2020) (December 3, 2020)

C R Bard Inc. v. AngioDynamics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020) (November 15, 2020)

On the Patent Eligibility of Graphical User Interfaces: Part II (Nov. 9, 2020)

On the Patent Eligibility of Graphical User Interfaces: Part I (Nov. 8, 2020)

Stupid § 101 Tricks (Nov. 1, 2020)

Realtime Data LLC v. Reduxio Systems, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020) (Oct. 26, 2020)

USPTO Publishes Report on AI-Related Policies (Oct. 10, 2020)

Federal Circuit Finds Calculating Machine Ineligible (Aug. 23, 2020)

The Three Properties of Patent-Eligibility: An Empirical Study (Jul. 30, 2020)

Federal Circuit Rules Public Key Cryptography Algorithm Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Jul. 22, 2020)

Packet Intelligence LLC v. NetScout Systems, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020) (Jul. 20, 2020)

Electronic Communication Technologies, LLC v. ShoppersChoice.com, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2020) (Jul 16, 2020)

Uniloc USA, Inc. v. LG Electronics USA, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020) (May 6, 2020)

USPTO Assesses the Impact of Patent Eligibility’s Changing Landscape (Apr. 27, 2020)

What is an Abstract Idea, Anyway? (March 1, 2020)

Artificial Intelligence-based Patents: Perspectives for Practitioners and Patent Owners (Feb. 20, 2020)

The Zombie Apocalypse of Patent Eligibility Reform and a Possible Escape Route (Feb. 4, 2020)

iLife Technologies, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc. (N.D. Tex. 2020) (Jan. 27, 2020)

USPTO Support for Filing in DOCX Format Still a Work in Progress (Jan. 7, 2020)