Kirstin Stoll-DeBell protects and defends patents and trademarks of computer software and technology clients. Known for her in-depth analysis of technologies and deep understanding of intellectual property law, Kirstin provides complex patent portfolio analysis and sophisticated opinion work. She engages clients in frequent communication and is a trusted adviser, particularly in helping clients balance their primary business goals with legal IP interests.

Patent and Trademark Litigation

Kirstin has extensive experience representing and defending computer software and other clients in high-stakes infringement actions. She is experienced in handling matters covering a spectrum of technology areas, including semiconductor circuit design and processing, cellular telephones, oxygen scavenging polymer compositions and casino gaming equipment.

Strategic IP Analysis and Protection

In addition to litigation, Kirstin performs strategic IP portfolio analysis. She negotiates and drafts patent, trademark and trade secret licensing agreements, and has experience filing and prosecuting trademark and patent applications. Kirstin also counsels clients on a variety of intellectual property matters, including trademark selection and usage and trade secret protection.

Kirstin co-authored the ABA bestseller Injunctive Relief: Temporary Restraining Orders and Preliminary Injunctions, covering a spectrum of issues from pre-filing considerations to appellate relief.

Personal Interests

Kirstin and her husband are avid golfers, and she looks forward to one day representing a company in the golf industry. She spends most of her off hours with her two boys, and enjoys skiing and traveling with her family.


  • Arrow Electronics, Inc. v. Arrow Partnership, LLC (D. Colo.). Defended Arrow Partnership against claim of trademark infringement. Won motion for attorneys’ fees ($450,000) after plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its complaint. First award of attorneys’ fees under the Octane Fitness standard for a trademark case in the Tenth Circuit.
  • Rudolph Technologies Inc. v. Camtek, Ltd. (D. Minn.): Represented Rudolph Technologies, who manufactures semiconductor inspection systems and owns several patents relating to this technology. The case settled favorably for Rudolph shortly after Kirstin argued several significant summary judgment motions.
  • ePlus v. Lawson Software (E.D. Va.): Represented Lawson in this patent infringement lawsuit involving computer software for e-procurement. Acted as second chair during a three-week jury trial in Richmond, Virginia. Successfully precluded plaintiff from pursuing its more than $30 million damages claim at trial through a Daubert motion and a Rule 37 sanctions motion. The jury found the core software modules did not infringe any claim, one add-on module infringed only one claim, and the remaining add-on module infringed only 5 of 12 asserted claims. All of the remaining claims were subsequently invalidated on appeal.
  • Prince Lionheart v. Halo Innovations (D. Colo.): Represented Halo in this trademark infringement lawsuit involving baby products. The case settled after Halo won a motion to compel Prince Lionheart's privileged documents relating to Halo's trademark fraud counterclaim.
  • Black & Decker v. Bosch, Appeal Dkt. No. 2007-1243 (Fed. Cir.): Represented Bosch in this appeal of a jury verdict finding infringement of patents relating to a combination radio/battery charger. The Federal Circuit vacated the infringement verdict and damages award because the district court erred in construing the claims.
  • Black & Decker v. Bosch, Civil Action No. 04 C 7955 (N.D. Ill.): Represented Bosch in this patent infringement lawsuit. Successfully precluded from trial Black & Decker's claims against Bosch's current accused product. Obtained a jury verdict invalidating two of the four independent claims and a damages award for the other claims that was less than a third of the damages sought.
  • Constar v. Ball, Civil Action No. 05-C-0669-C (W.D. Wis.): Represented Ball in a patent infringement action relating to oxygen scavenging polymer compositions. Achieved settlement shortly after Ball filed its motion for summary judgment of patent invalidity.
  • Motorola and Freescale v. Micron, Civil Action No. A 04 CA 007 LY (W.D. Tex) and Micron v. Motorola, Civil Action No. 04 C 0204 S (W.D. Wis.): Represented Motorola in this patent infringement lawsuit involving 37 patents. Successfully moved to transfer Micron's later filed lawsuit from the W.D. Wisconsin to be consolidated with Motorola's first filed lawsuit in the W.D. Texas. Case settled after we successfully moved to have the discovery divided into phases limited to six patents per phase.
  • Altira Group v. Philip Morris Companies, Civil Action No. 01-K-2344 (D. Colo.): Represented Altira Group in a trademark infringement lawsuit asserting Philip Morris' new name "ALTRIA" would create reverse confusion. Although the court denied our motion for a preliminary injunction, primarily because Philip Morris had not yet changed its name, we made new law on reverse confusion in the Tenth Circuit. The case settled after the district court refused to consolidate the preliminary injunction hearing with trial on the merits and indicated that it would stay discovery and trial until Philip Morris changed its name.
  • Smash v. New England Pottery Company, Civil Action No. 01-601 (D. Minn.): Prevailed on a motion to preliminarily enjoin NEPCO from selling its "Starlight Sphere" Christmas ornaments because they infringed Smash's patent.
  • Bryant v. American Greetings, Civil Action No. 99-WM-1819 (D. Colo.): Represented American Greetings in this lawsuit alleging American Greeting's use of a heart enclosing baby footprints design infringed plaintiffs' trademark. Achieved a favorable settlement after American Greetings filed a motion for summary judgment based on the trademark fair use defense.


Bar Admissions

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Court Admissions

U.S. Supreme Court
Colorado Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan


University of Colorado
B.A. in Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology (1995)

University of Colorado Law School
J.D. (1998)

Insights & Events

Other Perspectives
  • "Inequitable Conduct: Evolution and Considerations"
    Presenter, AIPLA Electronic and Computer Law Summit, June 19, 2018
  • "Practice Management in view of First-to-File — What changes do you need to make today?" 
    Presenter, Colorado Bar Association's IP Institute, May 29, 2015
  • "The Story of Maxwell v. J. Baker: A Case Study of Gender Issues in Intellectual Property Disputes"
    Panelist with Susan Maxwell, Inventor, Daniel McDonald, Patent Litigator, and Lisa DeCaro, Jury Consultant, October 31, 2011
  • "What to Do When You Are Enjoined" 
    Panelist with Tom Dougherty, Gates, Colorado Bar Association's IP Institute, May 2011
  • "Injunctive Relief: Temporary Restraining Orders and Preliminary Injunctions"
    Panelist with Nancy Dempsey and Brad Dempsey, Colorado Bar Association's IP Institute, May 2009
  • Injunctive Relief: Temporary Restraining Orders and Preliminary Injunctions
    Co-author, American Bar Association, 2009
  •  The Impact of eBay on Preliminary Injunctions in Intellectual Property Cases
    Author, The Edge: M&G's Intellectual Property White Paper, February 2008
  • "Injunctive Relief in Intellectual Property Cases"
    Presenter, Federal Bar Association Annual Meeting, September 2007
  • "Patent Law 101"
    Presenter, Colorado Bar Association's IP Institute, May 2007
  • "Using Presumptions to Tip the Balance for Injunctive Relief"
    Author, ABA's Litigation Magazine, Fall 2006
  • "Temporary Restraining Orders And Preliminary Injunctions: Pre-filing Considerations"
    Panelist, ABA Litigation Section Roundtable Outline, May 2003
  • "Willful Patent Infringement and Enhanced Damages: Recent Decisions"
    Author, ABA's IPL Section Newsletter, Spring 2003
  • "Attorney Opinions In Patent Litigation: Willfulness Shield Issue and Conflict of Interest Issue"
    Panelist, ABA Litigation Section Roundtable Outline, October 2001

Leadership & Community

Professional Associations

  • ChIPs
  • American Bar Association
  • Colorado Bar Association
  • Women in Technology International
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association

Civic Activities

  • Girls, Inc. — Volunteer
  • Girls, Inc. Eureka!® — Board Member
    Eureka! is a STEM program for underprivileged middle school and high school girls.


  • Chambers USA — Colorado, Intellectual Property, 2023
  • Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) Patent 1000: The World's Leading Patent Professionals — Colorado, 2017-23
  • Best Lawyers® — Litigation - Intellectual Property, 2016-20, 2023-24; Litigation - Patent, 2023-24
  • Law Week Colorado — Top Woman Lawyer for 2010
  • Colorado Rising Stars, 2010-13
The Faegre Baker Daniels website uses cookies to make your browsing experience as useful as possible. In order to have the full site experience, keep cookies enabled on your web browser. By browsing our site with cookies enabled, you are agreeing to their use. Review Faegre Baker Daniels' cookies information for more details.