1100 Peachtree Street NE Suite 2800, Atlanta, GA USA 30309
Troy Viger focuses his practice on trademark law and brings to it a technical expertise, which originates from his background in biomedical engineering and research experience with mathematics. Troy’s practice includes representing various brands throughout many industries in litigation proceedings before U.S. district courts, appellate courts, and the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Troy's trademark litigation experience involves pre-litigation due diligence, motion practice, managing and directing discovery, preparing and assisting with depositions, direct and cross examinations, and attending trial. He also counsels and assists clients with enforcement matters.
Prior to joining the firm, Troy was an associate in the Atlanta, Georgia office of an international full-service intellectual property law firm where he counseled clients on trademark enforcement, patent prosecution, and litigation, including developing intellectual property portfolios and executing successful strategies in USPTO administrative actions and legal proceedings before district courts and appellate courts from inception through trial and appeal.
During law school, Troy served as a judicial extern for the Honorable Leigh Martin May in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. He also interned in the Office of General Counsel at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Troy also served on the boards of the Georgia State University Law Review and Georgia State Moot Court. In the 2020 Saul Lefkowitz Moot Court Competition, he received first place overall, first place in Brief and Oralist, and second place in Oralist nationally.
Troy received “high honor” status on the 2023 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll list.
Experience
*Represented a large proxy and web data collection network in litigation in the Eastern District of Texas against a global technology company that offers web data collection and proxy services, related to patents involving proxy server technology. The case resulted in a favorable dismissal for the client.
*Experienced at the appellate court level before the Second Circuit and the Fourth Circuit.
*Practiced frequently before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
*Experience gained by attorney prior to joining Kilpatrick.
Insights View All
Publication
Georgia State University College of Law J.D. (2021) magna cum laude, CALI Award (Constitutional Law), Alan Rumph Fellowship Recipient
Mississippi State University B.S., Biological Engineering (2018) summa cum laude, President’s List, Dean’s List, Academic, Alumni, and Eva Hosmer Engineering Scholarship, Shackouls Honors College
Georgia (2021)
Supreme Court of Georgia
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Georgie State University Law Review, Executive Board, Research Editor (2020-2021)
Georgia State University Moot Court, Executive Board, Vice President of Competitions (2020-2021)
Georgia State University, Intellectual Property Law Society, Executive Board, Vice President for Programming (2019-2020)
Disclaimer
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.
