2025 Spring Meeting June 2025

AIPLA President Kim Van Voorhis and Board Member Melissa Buss reflected on their respective journeys in the organization, career growth, and leadership philosophies. 

Both women, with strong corporate litigation backgrounds, have served together on the AIPLA Board of Directors for the past three years. Melissa’s highlighted how her AIPLA journey began in law school in 1997. After an early period of active involvement, she balanced engagement with AIPLA and family life before returning to leadership roles such as Chair of the Women in IP Law Committee. She emphasized how AIPLA offered leadership experiences beyond what is often accessible in a traditional legal career. 

Kim's trajectory started through committee liaison roles, eventually becoming Chair of the Young Lawyers and Trademark Committees. Her time on the Board, both as a law firm partner and later as in-house counsel at Nike, gave her different perspectives on contributing to the Association. She credits her deep involvement in AIPLA as the best preparation for leading the organization. 

The discussion also highlighted work-life balance. Melissa shared her strategy of managing career, family, and AIPLA through a personal system based on “the rule of three” — daily priorities, annual work goals, and mentorship investments. Kim spoke about her need to stay engaged and the value she finds in mindfulness practices, gratitude journaling, and intentional reflection. 

Both women emphasized the importance of giving back. Kim noted that as her career has advanced, the drive to mentor and support others has grown. Melissa set personal goals to train 30 patent attorneys and mentor 50 women in IP, a reflection of her desire to pay forward the support she received in AIPLA. 

Their advice for young professionals joining AIPLA was to raise your hand, get involved, and follow through. AIPLA rewards initiative and consistent effort over connections. Whether through writing, programming, or committee work, there are opportunities for all skill sets—and confidence grows with participation. 

They also shared memorable leadership advice. For Melissa, it was learning to treat management direction as input—not gospel—and always prioritize family. For Kim, it was about embracing authenticity: being yourself is the most effective leadership style. 

Will Covey, Acting Deputy Director of the USPTO, opened the Spring Meeting by emphasizing the USPTO’s commitment to innovation, transparency, and collaboration with stakeholders like AIPLA, noting that “we always welcome your input,” and shared his appreciation for the strong relationship between the Office and AIPLA. 

Addressing the challenges facing the Office, Covey acknowledged the sharp increase in application pendency and backlog—currently around 820,000 unexamined patent applications. Without expanding staff, the USPTO has made progress through internal efficiency efforts and continues to explore ways to improve examination quality and speed. This includes integrating AI, cutting down on examiner administrative tasks, and introducing new incentives for examiners. 

On the trademarks front, the COVID-era surge in applications has created lasting strain, and the Office is actively working to reduce the backlog. Covey also noted the Office’s efforts to combat patent and trademark fraud, including terminating applications with false signatures. 

He provided updates on improvements at the PTAB, shared the USPTO’s recent recognition as the world leader in IP rights protection by the US Chamber of Commerce’s International IP Index, and underscored the Office’s active global engagement to advance strong IP systems worldwide. 

Looking ahead, Covey affirmed the USPTO’s commitment to patent quality and examination reform: “There is a recognition that we have to change the way the examination process works.” 

Tuesday’s Keynote Luncheon featured a panel examining the complex legal journey of Prince’s estate, moderated by the Meeting Officer in Charge Matthew Wagner. Panelists Joseph J. Cassioppi, Grant Fairbairn, and Karen Sandler Steinert of Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.—the firm ultimately appointed by Prince’s heirs—shared their firsthand experience navigating the legal intricacies of Prince’s estate. 

Following Prince’s passing without a will or trust, the legal team faced many people claiming to be heirs or asserting rights to his intellectual property. With no prior involvement in the estate, Fredrikson & Byron was brought in as counsel. The team worked to identify, organize, and protect Prince’s copyright and trademark portfolios—both critical to preserving the value and legacy of his creative work. 

Among the most notable legal battles discussed was Paisley Park Enterprises v. George Ian Boxill, involving an attempted unauthorized release of unreleased Prince recordings. The case illustrated the estate’s broader efforts to safeguard Prince’s rights of publicity and enforce confidentiality agreements. 

The panel offered invaluable insights into the intersection of entertainment law, estate administration, and IP protection. 

Day two’s opening plenary “Cultural Appropriation vs. Cultural Appreciation: The Role of IP Law in Protecting Traditional Knowledge and Expressions” explored how traditional Indigenous knowledge often exists outside the boundaries of Western intellectual property systems—and what it means to bridge that gap.

Kaniah Konkoly-Thege emphasized that Indigenous knowledge is collective, sacred, and intended to last through generations—fundamentally at odds with Western IP frameworks that prioritize individual ownership, commercialization, and limited terms. She pointed out that copyright law, for example, requires ideas to be “fixed,” while much of Indigenous knowledge is embodied through language, ceremony, and community—not written or recorded. She also shared how IP institutions, like WIPO and the USPTO, are taking initial steps to educate and support Native communities, but work remains. 

The conversation then turned to the story of Minnetonka. CEO David Miller and Reconciliation Advisor Adrienne Benjamin shared the company’s evolution from decades of cultural appropriation to a new model of collaboration. After years of selling Native-inspired moccasins, Minnetonka began reevaluating its role, eventually issuing a public apology and building direct relationships with Native artists and communities. One example: the brand now licenses a moccasin design by a Native artist, pays her royalties, and donates to a nonprofit chosen in partnership. 

The panel underscored the importance of authentic engagement, accountability, and co-creation when navigating the intersection of intellectual property and Indigenous heritage. As efforts continue to reimagine more inclusive IP frameworks, the Minnetonka case offers a real-world example of how reconciliation and respectful collaboration can take shape.