You've Got Ideas, We Protect Them

Kyle M. Costello

boyle fredrickson - Kyle M. Costello

Kyle focuses his practice on matters of intellectual property acquisition, enforcement and licensing. Kyle combines his training and technical skills with a personal understanding of his clients’ business needs. During licensing opportunities and dispute resolution, Kyle strives to offer creative and efficient strategies while seeking to obtain results consistent with his clients’ business objectives. His approach to customized intellectual property solutions, when blended with his understanding of his clients’ needs, leads to high-value results.

Kyle gained valuable experience at the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) where he engaged in research associated with patented biological and chemical technologies. At WARF, Kyle also worked directly with inventors and researchers to provide practical solutions to critical challenges in intellectual property rights. His efforts were often directed towards the management of WARF’s patent portfolio through strategic academic licensing and market research.

Kyle’s experience also includes service to one of the magistrate judges in the Eastern District of Wisconsin. This provided him with valuable knowledge with respect to the finer details of the judicial decision processes. His position with the Court also allowed Kyle to learn the primary tools for effective client advocacy throughout various stages of federal litigation and mediation.

Academics & Education

  • Marquette University, B.S. Biological Sciences, minor in Chemistry
  • University of Wisconsin Law School, J.D.
    • Intellectual Property Student Organization, Acting Director
    • Wisconsin Law Review, Managing Editor


  • Wisconsin Bar Association
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

Awards & Recognitions

Grand Prize Recipient of the Foley & Lardner 10th Annual IP Writing Competition for penning The State of the Patent Exhaustion Doctrine, Post-Quanta v. LG Electronics. His piece argued that contractual use restrictions on the sale of a patented article, which are reasonably related to the scope of the patent, may still be enforced through the patentee’s infringement action against a breaching purchaser.