Reading Between the Lines: Making Sense of Source Code in IP Litigation (Presented by the Federal Bar Association’s Intellectual Property Section)

Bert Schiettecatte
Padmaja Chinta
Micah Block
Bert Schiettecatte | Noisetron LLC
Padmaja Chinta | Dunnington Bartholow & Miller
Micah Block | Davis Polk

Live Video-Broadcast: November 4, 2026

1 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
This program is only available to All-Access Pass Members.
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

The code holds the answer — if your team can read it

In patent and IP litigation, the evidence that decides the case may live in the source code — and reviewing it is as challenging as it is critical. This practical panel pairs an IP and technology litigator with a software and code expert, under an IP litigation moderator, to walk the review end to end.

The sequence mirrors a real engagement. Why source code matters in litigation. Scoping the review and identifying the right code. Moving from code to functionality — understanding what the software does. Working with consulting and testifying technical experts. And turning technical findings into the litigation story.

Attendees leave with practical strategies, the common pitfalls flagged before they are stepped in, and lessons learned for presenting source-code findings — the judgment calls that turn complex source-code evidence into a clear and persuasive case. The hour closes with takeaways and Q&A.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • Why Source Code Matters
    Why source-code review can be critical — and challenging — in patent and IP litigation.
  • Scoping the Review
    Key considerations when planning and conducting source-code review: identifying the right code and connecting it to the issues in the case.
  • From Code to Functionality
    Understanding what the software does — and what that means for the case.
  • Working with Technical Experts
    Practical strategies for working with consulting and testifying technical experts.
  • Telling the Litigation Story
    Turning technical findings into the litigation story and using source-code findings in litigation.
  • Pitfalls to Avoid
    Recognizing and avoiding common pitfalls in source-code review and the presentation of source-code evidence.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: November 4, 2026

  • 2:00 pm – 3:00 pm Eastern
  • 1:00 pm – 2:00 pm Central
  • 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm Mountain
  • 11:00 am – 12:00 pm Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Bert Schiettecatte, Founder | Noisetron LLC

Bert Schiettecatte is a consulting and testifying expert witness and the founder of Noisetron LLC, bringing over 30 years of software and hardware engineering experience to complex patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and breach-of-contract disputes.

  • Education & Credentials

Bert frequently lectures on source code review for legal organizations including NYIPLA, OCBA, and the State Bar of Texas, and holds graduate degrees from Stanford University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (summa cum laude)
His graduate degrees are an MSc/CS from Vrije Universiteit Brussel (summa cum laude) and an MA/MST from Stanford University’s CCRMA.

  • Recognition & Leadership

His invention of AudioCubes, a tangible user interface system, earned the Qwartz Max Mathews Award. He is a fellow of the Belgian-American Educational Foundation (BAEF), an honorary Fulbright fellow, and a recipient of the Audio Engineering Society (AES) Educational Foundation Grant.

  • Professional Involvement

He is a member of the IEEE and the IEEE Computer Society and an associate member of the AES. His published work spans tangible interfaces, real-time acoustics, and real-time software performance, and he taught information theory and digital signal processing to graduate students at Leuven Catholic University (KUL) and Brussels Free University (VUB) as a teaching assistant.

  • Experience

His technical background spans system architecture and software development across desktop, server, mobile, and embedded hardware platforms. He specializes in real-time applications, including audio and video processing, wireless communication, and low-latency algorithmic trading, directly informing his work in deep-dive source code review and forensic analysis. Earlier, he founded Percussa, where he engineered multichannel audio signal processing platforms and award-winning wireless tangible user interfaces, and co-founded a stealth proprietary trading startup developing software and algorithms for crypto and futures markets.

 

Padmaja Chinta, Partner | Dunnington Bartholow & Miller

Padmaja Chinta is a partner at Dunnington Bartholow & Miller where she represents med-tech innovators, pharmaceutical leaders, and technology companies in patent and trade secret litigation across the U.S. – cases where innovation and business continuity are on the line.

  • Education & Credentials

Padmaja earned her LL.M. at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where she was elected President of the LL.M. Association. She is admitted to practice in New York, the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, and at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Padmaja is a Fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America, ranked by Legal500 NY Elite for intellectual property, and a NY Super Lawyer.

  • Professional Involvement

She is a past chair of the FBA’s IP Section and the current vice-president for second circuit.

  • Experience

She has obtained significant victories in claim constructions, summary judgment, TROs, pre-trial, and §101 motions to dismiss for her clients.

 

Micah Block, Partner | Davis Polk

A partner in Davis Polk’s IP Litigation group, Micah represents major corporations in must-win cases.

  • Education & Credentials

Micah earned his J.D. from Stanford Law School, where he was elected to the Order of the Coif, and his B.A. in Ethics, Politics and Economics from Yale University, magna cum laude. He clerked for Hon. Raymond C. Fisher of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2009–2010), and is admitted in California and before federal courts including the Federal Circuit, the Ninth Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Among other industry recognition, Micah is recognized for patent litigation by IAM and Chambers, where clients describe him as “a very deep and creative thinker” and “a superstar of the future.” Micah serves as the co-hiring partner of Davis Polk’s Northern California office.

  • Professional Involvement

He maintains an active pro bono practice with a focus on civil rights, criminal justice and immigration matters.

  • Experience

He litigates patent, trade-secret, antitrust and other matters for clients including Apple, Cisco, Comcast, JPMorgan, Novo Nordisk, Plaid, the United States Golf Association and Verisk Analytics. Micah is a seasoned trial lawyer with a deep understanding of technology and a proven track record of success.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Reading Between the Lines: Making Sense of Source Code in IP Litigation | Bert Schiettecatte & Micah Block & Padmaja Chinta | 2:00pm – 3:00pm

Source-code review can be critical—and challenging—in patent and IP litigation. This practical panel brings together an IP and technology litigator, a software/code expert, and an IP litigation moderator to explore how to approach source-code review effectively, from identifying the right code, to connecting it to the issues in the case, working with consulting and testifying technical experts and presenting findings in litigation. The panel will highlight common pitfalls, practical strategies, and lessons learned for turning complex source-code evidence into a clear and persuasive case.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
1 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
1 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Illinois

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
1 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
1 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
1 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
1 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
1.2 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
60 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
1 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
1 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
1 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
1 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
1.2 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
1 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
How Qualified Settlement Funds Streamline Settlements
How Qualified Settlement Funds Streamline Settlements Thu, October 15, 2026
Live Webcast
Recovering Elder Financial Exploitation Losses
Recovering Elder Financial Exploitation Losses Tue, October 20, 2026
Live Webcast