United States > Intellectual property > Patent litigation: full coverage
Index of tables
Patent litigation: full coverage
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P.
Fish & Richardson P.C.
- Kirkland & Ellis LLP
- Baker Botts L.L.P.
- Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
- DLA Piper
- Fulbright & Jaworski LLP
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Kaye Scholer LLP
Keker & Van Nest, L.L.P.
- Latham & Watkins LLP
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
- White & Case LLP
- Leora Ben-Ami - Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Morgan Chu -
Irell & Manella LLP
William Lee -
Charles Lipsey -
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P.
- Harold McElhinny - Morrison & Foerster LLP
Robert Van Nest -
Keker & Van Nest, L.L.P.
Charles Verhoeven -
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Full service IP firm Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P. retains a leading reputation for patent litigation work. It is particularly rated for its appellate practice, with Donald Dunner being one of its best-known figures. In a case addressing the joint infringement standard, the practice successfully represented Akamai Technologies to obtain a reversal of a lower court decision that decided Limelight had not infringed the client’s patented technology. Another appeal win was achieved for InterDigital, which reversed an ITC decision finding Nokia did not infringe the client’s patents for 3G mobile technology. James Monroe and Michael Flibbert have particular experience in Hatch-Waxman litigation. The team achieved a favorable appeal ruling as co-counsel to the plaintiff in Otsuka v Sandoz, which affirmed a district court decision holding asserted claims of a patent covering the Abilify drug to be valid and protected until 2015. It also successfully represented Pronova Biopharma in winning patent protection for its Lovaza product, which faced a generic challenge from defendants Teva, Apotex and Par Pharmaceuticals. Doris Johnson Hines focuses on district court and ITC proceedings. Laura Masurovsky leads the litigation practice and has experience in both trial and appellate level cases.
Fish & Richardson P.C. handles a high volume of district court patent cases and is highly regarded for its strong trial experience. It returned to acting for the defendant in the precedent-setting Prometheus v Mayo, with the Supreme Court recently ruling that the patent held by the plaintiff to be invalid because it covers a law of nature and not an innovative new process. Life sciences litigation practice head Jonathan Singer and experienced appellate lawyer John Dragseth led on the case. On the technology side, the firm obtained a win for defendant Adobe Systems against a patent infringement case brought by Tarkus Imaging in a Delaware district court hearing. The practice successfully acted for the defendant in Eolas Technologies v Adobe Systems at an Eastern District of Texas trial. It was also co-counsel to numerous defendants in CEATS v Continental Airlines, achieving a ruling of invalidation for patent claims regarding a method to reserve specific seats at events. Key attorneys are trial and appellate lawyer David Healey, Frank Scherkenbach, who focuses on high-technology cases and Dallas office trial practice head Thomas Melsheimer.Kirkland & Ellis LLP’s team is ‘highly knowledgeable and provides sophisticated advice’. Despite some high-profile team losses in recent years, it continues to achieve high-value wins for major clients.Steven Cherny continued a successful representation of CR Bard, with a Federal Circuit appeal affirming a district court verdict that the client’s patent was infringed and upholding a $800m-plus damages and royalties award. Gregg LoCascio obtained a $105.9m award for a subsidiary company of Schlumberger as plaintiff in a trial against Ion, concerning patents for oil exploration equipment. He also successfully defended Siemens at a Supreme Court appeal brought by Saint-Gobain, with a previous federal appeal ruling upheld and a damages award increased in favor of the client. Gregory Arovas (‘thoughtful and aggressive; thorough knowledge of the law and how it relates to business’) led for Apple in a patent ownership claim dispute against Kodak. Luke Dauchot (‘strong trial lawyer and a good team leader’), of counsel Mark Pals, who leads the pharma and biotech patent litigation group, William Streff, who is experienced in advising Japanese clients, and the up-and-coming Adam Alper are all recommended. High-profile trial lawyer Leora Ben-Ami brought a team over to the New York office from Kaye Scholer LLP. She acts for life sciences clients such as Bristol Myers Squibb and Genentech.
WilmerHale has a strong track record for taking to trial high-stakes, complex patent litigation matters, with William Lee commanding a longstanding reputation as one of the country’s leading patent trial litigators. The practice remains busy in trial and appellate work for major clients such as Abbott Laboratories, Wyeth, Becton Dickinson, P&G, Broadcom and Oracle. Mark Matuschak and Andrew Grossman successfully led for RIM in obtaining a reversal of a $147.2m verdict awarded to plaintiff Mformation Technologies. Mark Flanagan is a lead lawyer for Intel in a multi-defendant lawsuit brought by MOSAID. Robert Gunther and Lisa Pirozzolo have been handling life sciences-related cases for Novartis. Appellate and Supreme Court litigator William McElwain is another key attorney.
IP boutique Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto’s life sciences-focused practice fields a team of ‘very experienced IP lawyers that are extremely responsive and business savvy’. It litigates a high volume of Hatch-Waxman cases on behalf of brand name companies such as Medtronic, Novartis, Sanofi and Warner Chilcott and to a lesser extent, handles some patent litigation covering other technologies for clients such as Canon and IBM. John Murnane and Robert Baechtold were co-counsel to the plaintiff in a successful federal appeal of Otsuka v Sandoz. Litigation group head Scott Reed and trial attorney Filko Prugo obtained favorable district court rulings for Genzyme as plaintiff. Henry Renk and Bruce Haas both provide ‘practical solutions to difficult problems’. The team successfully defended AstraZeneca against a patent challenge to its blockbuster drug Seroquel by a number of generics companies. Nicholas Cannella achieved a favorable ruling for Gilead Sciences in a multibillion-dollar case against Teva.
Irell & Manella LLP handles a range of cases across the full spectrum of industries, covering pharmaceuticals, medical devices and other technologies. Morgan Chu is ‘a dazzling trial lawyer’ who remains the practice’s best-known figure and leading litigator. He and Andrei Iancu continued representing TiVo in litigation regarding patents for TV and digital video technology products, with disputes against both Verizon and AT&T ending in cross-licensing deals and multimillion-pound settlement payouts for the client. The team also obtained a permanent injunction on behalf of St Jude Medical against defendant Access Closure to prevent it from making or selling its infringing vascular closure medical devices. The practice achieved a similar result for Skechers as defendant in a dispute with Cobra International, which resulted in a licensing arrangement to Cobra’s patent on sequential lighting. It scored an appeal win for Santarus as plaintiff, with the Federal Circuit reversing a lower court decision, allowing its client to continue efforts in blocking Par Pharmaceutical from selling generic versions of the Zegerid heartburn drug. Gary Frischling and Jonathan Kagan are other key attorneys.
Morrison & Foerster LLP provides ‘exceptional legal and technical understanding’ for complex, high-stakes patent litigation matters and has taken some of the most important recent cases to trial. Harold McElhinny is ‘one of the top trial attorneys, who is involved in cases from the beginning unlike some others. He always has the big picture in mind and has a strong persuasive ability in court’. He and Eric Acker (‘a really strong young trial attorney’) successfully obtained a ruling of invalidity on behalf of Nikon as defendant to patent infringement claims brought by Anvik. Michael Jacobs represented Oracle in a closely watched IP dispute against Google. IP litigation co-chair Rachel Krevans has deep experience across electronics and biosciences sectors and recently won for Bayer as plaintiff in a trial against Abbott Diabetes Care. David Doyle handles ANDA litigation for Sandoz.
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP provides ‘high-quality lawyers, advice and results’ in handling high-value cases across the hi-tech and life sciences fields. The practice has been active in both district and federal court proceedings as well as before the ITC. Charles Verhoeven led for HTC in its smartphone patent litigation battle with Apple and obtained a ruling of non-infringement on two OS patents as well as a favorable reversal on appeal of an initial determination on another patent. Verhoeven, David Nelson and Edward DeFranco are also lead partners for Motorola in various offensive and defensive cases against Apple, Microsoft and Gemalto. Peter Armenio obtained summary judgment of non-infringement on behalf of Covidien against Applied Medical Resources. He also successfully represented American Express on appeal against NPE SmartMetric, which had originally claimed patent assertion in relation to the client’s contactless pay product. Other highlights included obtaining a $50m damages award on behalf of Shelbyzyme as plaintiff in a patent infringement claim brought against Genzyme. John Quinn is ‘a titan in the area of complex litigation’. Carey Ramos, Robert Wilson, Sean Pak and David Eiseman are also recommended.
Sidley Austin LLP’s patent litigation team is ‘business focused, has in-depth industry knowledge and a deep bench of litigators’ which can handle matters for leading names in hi-tech and life sciences sectors as well as offering expertise on finance industry-related patent matters; it has represented Genentech, J&J, GSK, Microsoft, RIM and HP. David Pritikin (‘efficient, practical, lots of pharma experience’) led for Merck as plaintiff in a successful Hatch-Waxman dispute against Mylan, obtaining a ruling of patent validity for the client’s blockbuster cholesterol drugs. In the technology space, the firm is representing SynQor on an appeal brought by a group of defendants in challenging the lower court decision to award the client $110m in damages. The practice is also handling pending federal appeal and district court matters for LG Electronics. Bryan Anderson is also recommended.
Covington & Burling LLP has a strong reputation for its IP litigation work, handling ITC, trial and appellate proceedings for a number of blue-chip clients. Warner Chilcott, JPMorgan Chase, Samsung, Shire and Merck are among the representative clients across life sciences and other technologies. George Pappas achieved a successful win for J&J subsidiary group Janssen Pharmaceuticals in ANDA litigation brought against Lupin, with a district court hearing upholding the validity of the client’s birth control drug patent. The practice also obtained a favorable appeal decision on behalf of Palm, which affirmed a district court summary judgment of non-infringement on patents asserted by Intermec Technologies. Robert Haslam was a lead attorney on the matter and comes highly recommended for his trial expertise. Sturgis Sobin and Maureen Browne lead on Section 337 investigations.
Jones Day has ‘a strong, deep bench of talent and capabilities’, led by Anthony Insogna and Brian Poissant. Poissant represented Myriad in a Federal Circuit hearing, which affirmed the client’s right of eligibility to patent two genes. He also acted for the plaintiff in Marine Polymer Technologies v HemCon, with an en banc federal appeal hearing affirming a patent infringement judgment in favor of the client regarding asserted patent claims for biocompatible polymers. Blaney Harper is ‘a hard working and aggressive advocate, with a creative mind that seeks new solutions to old problems’, who won for defendants in Email Link v Treasure Island at a district court hearing. The practice also successfully obtained summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of IBM as defendant to a case brought by Auburn University. Hilda Galvan (‘a highly skilled negotiator, spot-on advice’), David Witcoff (‘client focused and possesses a rare blend of engineering/scientific knowledge as well as top notch trial skills’), Greg Lanier and Steven Corr are all key attorneys.
Kenyon & Kenyon LLP continues to handle a range of trial, appellate and ITC matters, and has a full coverage practice, with Robert Bosch, The Volkswagen Group and Watson Pharmaceuticals among its representative clients. Patent litigators Elizabeth Holland and William James were counsel to Teva and Yeda as plaintiffs in successful Hatch-Waxman cases against Sandoz, Mylan and other generic drug manufacturers regarding the clients’ asserted patents for Copaxone. Walter Hanley led on a successful Federal Circuit hearing for the defendant in Trans Video Electronics v Sony Electronics, which affirmed a lower court ruling of summary judgment that found asserted patent claims to be invalid. IP litigators Mark Hannemann, Michael Lennon and Richard DeLucia are also key attorneys.
McDermott Will & Emery LLP’s national practice handles a high volume of life sciences and hi-tech-related patent litigation, with ‘attorneys that are highly capable and very responsive’. Sarah Columbia leads the IP litigation practice from Boston. She obtained a favorable federal court ruling for defendants Zimmer and Seikagaku in a case brought by Genzyme, which overturned a previous decision to find that the clients did not infringe a patent for a method to treat arthritic pain. The life sciences team has also been handling Hatch-Waxman litigation for Tolmar and Sandoz, as well as acting for Isis in asserting patent claims in relation to antisense drug technology against Santaris. In hi-tech and related areas, the practice is counsel to HTC on various disputes, including against NPE MobileMedia Ideas and on both district court and ITC proceedings against Nokia. Silicon Valley-based Yar Chaikovsky won an Eastern District of Texas trial for defendant Yahoo! against an allegation of patent infringement brought by Bedrock Computer Technologies. Terrence McMahon worked with Joel Freed and Blair Jacobs in Washington DC, representing Fairchild in litigation against Power Integrations. Eric Hagen is ‘a first-class lawyer who always provides reliable advice and strong advocacy’.
McKool Smith PC has a strong trial practice that has become well known for achieving high plaintiff-damages awards against major technology companies. It recently obtaining a $368m damages win for VirnetX in a case brought against Apple and has also asserted further claims. It also continues to represent R&D and licensing company WiLAN in infringement claims against various wireless technology companies and is acting for Gemalto in filing an Android technology patent infringement lawsuit against Google and smartphone makers HTC, Motorola and Samsung. It is also acting for Medtronic in a case against Wyeth. Samuel Baxter and Garret Chambers co-counsel TiVo in disputes against Cisco regarding patents for set-top cable boxes as well as defending against claims brought by Motorola and General Instrument. Douglas Cawley is ‘fantastic in preparing complex cases for a jury trial. He has a unique ability to perceive how the jury will view a case’. Theodore Stevenson is ‘a clever attorney who is able to identify the key issues in even the most complex cases early on and prepare the right strategy for winning on those issues’. Mike McKool is another key attorney. The firm expanded its West Coast base further with the hire of Courtland Reichman from King & Spalding LLP to head up its new Silicon Valley office.
Paul Hastings LLP ‘continues to build its IP practice across a range of technical areas’ under the leadership of key figures such as Jeff Randall and Joseph O’Malley. The New York team leads on pharmaceutical sector patent litigation, with O’Malley and Bruce Wexler both having ‘extensive patent litigation experience, with strategical considerations and observations being very sophisticated and right to the point. They are splendid at trial’. They act for clients such as Merck and Amgen, and Gerald Flattmann and O’Malley successfully represented Galderma Laboratories in Hatch-Waxman litigation against Mylan regarding the client’s rosacea drug Oracea, obtaining a district court ruling that bars the defendant from selling a generic version until 2027. Atlanta-based Steven Park is ‘a talented, knowledgeable lawyer who possesses the mix of technical expertise and legal acumen that delivers results’. Park and Washington DC-based Randall are defending RIM in a number of disputes. Other representative clients include AT&T, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Toshiba and Barclays Bank.
Ropes & Gray LLP has been handling high-stakes, bet-the-company patent litigation, led by a team offering deep trial and appellate experience. Key attorneys include lead trial counsel Bradford Badke, Silicon Valley-based James Batchelder, Jesse Jenner, who has focused on medical devices, electronics, software and related areas, and IP litigator Laurence Rogers. The firm won for the defendants in Therasense and Abbott v Becton Dickinson and Nova, with a district court hearing reaffirm a previous ruling to find the asserted patent unenforceable for inequitable conduct. The practice represented Motorola in a number of cases against Microsoft, including an ITC investigation filed on behalf of the client in relation to patents for Xbox gaming consoles and related software. It is also currently litigating on claims and counterclaims in the fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) rate-setting dispute, which could set a precedent for reasonable royalty rates for standards-essential patents. Other highlights included being counsel to Google and YouTube as successful defendants in a case brought by Eolas Technologies asserting patents that cover ‘interactive’ features on the Internet. It also acted for the defendant in DealerTrack v RouteOne, with a Federal Circuit appeal affirming a lower court ruling to find the plaintiff’s patent to be invalid.
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP has struggled to make up for the strength-in-depth it previously had, following a spate of high-profile departures of leading litigators. However, it remains involved in key trial and appellate matters, thanks to an experienced team under the leadership of Jared Bobrow. He and Edward Reines were counsel to Amazon and Yahoo! in Eolas Technologies v Adobe Systems, with the clients successfully defended at a federal hearing on alleged infringement of ‘interactive web’ patents. Bobrow also represented Cisco in disputes against TiVo regarding digital video recorder technology patents. Reines was counsel to defendant Hitachi Global Storage Technologies in an appellate win against MIT and MagSil at the Federal Circuit, which affirmed a lower court ruling dismissing asserted patent claims as invalid for lack of enablement. Brian Ferguson and Mark Davis have been involved in representing Apple in disputes with Kodak and Motorola. David Lender was co-counsel to GE in obtaining a $170m federal jury verdict against defendant Mitsubishi, with a ruling that the client’s wind turbine technology patent was infringed.
Winston & Strawn LLP ‘truly adopts a client’s mission as its own’ and provides both strong technical knowledge and commercial sense for winning high-stakes patent litigation matters. Its core strength remains in the life sciences although it has been increasingly handling disputes across a broader range of technologies, such as hi-tech, electronics and telecoms. IP chair George Lombardi leads the team from Chicago and is widely recognized for his lead trial counsel capabilities on high-profile cases. Lombardi won a $1bn damages award for the plaintiff in Monsanto v DuPont, obtaining a ruling that the asserted biotechnology patent is valid and infringed. James Hurst provides ‘technically good, commercially appropriate, timely and strategic advice’. He successfully represented generic drug companies Caraco and Sun Pharmaceuticals as defendants against Novo Nordisk at the Supreme Court, obtaining a reversal of a Federal Circuit decision to rule in favor of generics manufacturers in relation to use of the counterclaim provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act. He also won for the defendant in a Federal Circuit appeal hearing of Pharma SA and Sanofi-Aventis v Hospira, which affirmed a district court ruling to find the asserted patents claims invalid and obtained through "inequitable conduct". Alfred Fabricant (‘very good experience, knowledge and judgment’) successfully acted for defendants in McKesson Automation v Swisslog Italia to obtain a ruling of non-infringement. David Enzminger won for Belkin as defendant to a case brought by Fujitsu, with a district court ruling that the asserted patent claim for wireless networking cards is invalid.
Baker Botts L.L.P. ‘provides an outstanding level of technical knowledge and practical approaches to matters’ and has strong trial experience at both district and federal court levels. Barton Showalter leads the team, which retains a strong focus on hi-tech-related industries and has recently handled a number of Federal Circuit trials. These include obtaining a $35m-plus damages win for the plaintiff in Halliburton Energy Services v Weatherford International. It also achieved a favorable ruling of infringement on asserted claims and a $48.5m award for the plaintiffs in Enzo Biochem and Yale University v Applera Corp. Rob Maier was a lead partner for plaintiff SME Plasma Physics in a successful $10.8m win against Chi Mei. The ‘thorough, knowledgeable and practical’ Douglas Kubehl is defending AT&T Mobility in Greenville Communications v Verizon, which brought claims against all major wireless telecoms companies. Mark Whitaker leads the ITC practice, which is particularly recommended for representing third parties in Section 337 investigations. IP litigator Hopkins Guy joined the Silicon Valley office from Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP and brings further depth of expertise in high-technology-related matters. Austin office IP head Kevin Meek is also recommended.
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP draws on its highly regarded general litigation capabilities to represent clients such as Xerox, Mylan and Medinol in high-stakes trial, appellate and ITC proceedings for patent disputes. The ‘brilliant and creative’ Keith Hummel and David Greenwald, who is experienced in life sciences patent litigation, are currently acting for Qualcomm on a dispute covering over 80 of the client’s telecoms products against Parkervision. Peter Barbur has represented Time Warner in a number of matters and is currently defending the client in Augme Technologies v AOL.
DLA Piper provides ‘cost effective service’ and ‘solid, practical advice which relates to business as well as the letter of the law’. It has been involved in some high-stakes matters, acting for Apple in ITC proceedings against HTC. In San Diego, John Allcock and Sean Cunningham are representing Motorola and Time Warner Cable in asserting patent claims against TiVo. The practice has developed its focus on competitor cases in the life sciences area, with a New York team representing St Jude Medical in disputes against rival company Volcano regarding patents for pressure wire technology used for heart patients. Los Angeles-based Richard de Bodo obtained a favorable ruling of non-infringement for Pfizer as defendant to allegations brought by AntiCancer. Mark Fowler and John Guaragna are both ‘knowledgeable, responsive, efficient, practical and aware of client goals’. Joseph Lavelle provides ‘top-notch, bar-none technical understanding’. Andrew Valentine is also recommended for high-stakes patent litigation matters. (Richard de Bodo has left the firm since publication.)
Fulbright & Jaworski LLP’s ‘cost effective team is a sound mixture of different skill sets that are used in a highly focused manner’. It acts for clients across a range of industry sectors, including high-tech and electronics. Dallas-based trial lawyer Brett Govett has ‘excellent litigation instincts and the ability to interact with opponents and the courts with candor and sound instinct’. In Houston, Robert Harrell (‘a fine strategic mind to maximize a focused effort to a particular outcome’) has strong experience in federal and state court litigation. Patent litigator Eric Hall has ‘a facile technical mind able to convert very difficult concepts to a level comprehensible to the broadest range of recipients’. He acts for hi-tech and telecoms sector clients. Commercial litigator Karl Dial, global IP co-chair James Repass, Houston office IP practice head Charles Walker and experienced jury trial lawyer Bill Slusser are all recommended.
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP has broad technical expertise and trial litigation experience across district, federal and ITC proceedings. IP co-chair Wayne Barsky has been handling a number of multi-defendant representations. These include for pharmaceutical companies in a patent infringement case brought by Biogen regarding a patent for blockbuster drug REBIF. Barsky is also acting for various companies, including Activision in patent lawsuits brought by Walker Digital. Fellow co-chair Josh Krevitt is defending T-Mobile against a dispute brought by NPE Intellectual Ventures asserting 16 patents. He also acted for the same party as well as AT&T Mobility and Roamware as defendants to a patent infringement case filed by Starhome, with a favorable district ruling obtained for the clients. The co-chairs are also acting for Novo Nordisk in ANDA litigation cases against Actavis, Sandoz, Lupin and Caraco. Jeffrey Thomas represents the plaintiffs in Allergan v Apotex, regarding patents for eyelash growth drug Latisse. Co-chair Mark Reiter and New York-based Benjamin Hershkowitz are other key attorneys.
Kaye Scholer LLP retains a small, high-quality practice despite the high-profile losses of former practice co-chair Alan Fisch and two other attorneys, who left to start up IP litigation boutique Fisch Hoffman Sigler LLP, while Leora Ben-Ami took a team of four partners to Kirkland & Ellis LLP. The firm fields a team with strong technical expertise and trial experience across life sciences and other technologies. In the pharmaceutical sector, Daniel DiNapoli and Aaron Stiefel have successfully represented Pfizer in a dispute against Teva regarding market exclusivity for the Viagra product and is also defending the client in a case brought by generic drug company Apotex. On the biotechnology side, Michael Malecek and Peter Root obtained a motion of summary judgment for Affymetrix and Complete Genomics in patent infringement disputes. Malacek is also advising Google on litigation brought by Walker Digital. Hi-tech specialist David Benyacar and trial lawyer Daniel Reisner have been defending Time Warner Cable on patent infringement cases.
Keker & Van Nest, L.L.P. continues to raise its profile thanks to its involvement as defendant counsel in high-stakes patent trial cases. The practice’s best known figure Robert Van Nest, as well as Christa Anderson, was counsel to the defendant in winning one of the most significant recent IP disputes, Oracle v Google, in which the plaintiff sought nearly $6bn in damages in relation to patent infringement claims for the Java software system. The firm also successfully defended Twitter at trial against patent infringement claims brought by VS Technologies. Ongoing matters include defending HTC in ITC and district court proceedings against Kodak, representing Netflix as one of several respondents in a Section 337 investigation brought by Rovi, and acting for AOL and Google as defendants to a patent infringement case filed by Suffolk Technologies. Brian Ferrall, David Silbert and Matthias Kamber all have ‘strategic thinking, the ability to leverage knowledge from other areas of law in patent cases and dedication to a client’s cause’.
Latham & Watkins LLP’s broad-based litigation capabilities allows it to handle a range of trial, appellate and ITC proceedings for clients such as AOL, Vizio, Honeywell and Symantec. The practice has also been handling a number of Section 337 investigations as well as acting for Monsanto on disputes against Pioneer and DuPont. IP litigation co-chair Maximilian Grant and patent litigator Matthew Moore are acting for the defendant in EI DuPont De Nemours and Company v Heraeus Holding. Moore was also counsel to Amazon as defendant in a successful dismissal of numerous claims brought by OIP Technologies, with the district court ruling on a failure to claim patentable subject matter. Daniel Brown focuses on the life sciences sector and leads on pharmaceutical patent litigation matters alongside Kenneth Schuler. They have been leading on ANDA litigation for Cadence Pharmaceuticals and Par Pharmaceuticals. Jonathan Link joined from Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton in late 2012.
Arnold & Porter LLP has longstanding experience and a solid reputation for high-stakes patent litigation matters, acting for clients across a wide range of industries. Its credentials include acting for Boston Scientific in long-running coronary stents patent disputes, with obtaining summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of the client in one case against Cordis. It also won a patent infringement case for Hologic as plaintiff, with claims regarding the mammogram cushion medical device successfully asserted against IZI. Ongoing representations include acting for GE-owned SightSound Technologies in filing a patent infringement case against Apple in relation to the defendant’s iTunes platform. The firm also represented Google in a multi-defendant lawsuit brought by a patent holding company in possession of cloud computing patents developed by Symantec, and is handling district court patent infringement cases for HP as defendant. In Washington DC, Matthew Wolf frequently acts as lead trial counsel on the team’s key patent litigation cases, with particular experience in both medical and computer technologies. Also in the same office, Edward Han handles complex IP cases. On the West Coast, Michael Berta has experience in both federal court and ITC proceedings, with James Blackburn, James DiBoise and Jennifer Sklenar also key attorneys.
Cooley LLP has ‘a good bench of litigation talent that is skilled in defending hi-tech clients’. The team is also well regarded for its cost-effective service and solid industry knowledge. Michael Rhodes and Heidi Keefe successfully defended Facebook against a $100m damages claim brought by Leader Technologies in both district and federal court proceedings. Stephen Neal has tried numerous patent cases. Ronald Lemieux ‘provides honest, in-depth advice’ on patent litigation matters and has strong appellate experience. Jonathan Graves focuses on a broad range of technologies, including medical devices, hi-tech and consumer products. Stephen Smith is recommended for his knowledge on Section 337 investigations. Smith, IP litigation head Thomas Friel and Tim Teter successfully represented Nintendo as respondent to an ITC case filed by Creative Kingdom. Smith and Friel have also handled ITC investigations for HTC.
Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP’s patent litigation team, split across Atlanta, New York and the Silicon Valley, has been handling high-stake trial and appellate litigation matters in the hi-tech and related industries. IP group head Douglas Lumish has ‘an excellent grasp of patent law and the ability to create win/win results’. He has strong experience as lead trial counsel on complex, high-value patent cases. Litigator and trial lawyer Jeffrey Homrig has handled numerous high-technology-related patent cases for clients such as Skype and Oracle. The team was trial counsel to Google and YouTube as successful defendants in a case brought by Eolas Technologies asserting claims for interactive web patents. The firm also won appeals for Hitachi and Yahoo! with both rulings upholding previous judgments in favor of the clients. Ongoing defense representations are being handled for Oracle and Apple. John North and Jeffrey Toney are counsel to Watson Laboratories on Hatch-Waxman disputes.
Full service IP firm Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP is based across the West Coast and in Washington DC, with key litigator Joseph Re having extensive trial and appellate experience. Joe Jennings and Phillip Bennett have so far obtained a favorable Markman claim construction ruling for the plaintiff in KFx Medical Corp v Arthrex, with the client, a medical devices company, bringing infringement claims in relation to a patent that broadly covers the method of knotless double row rotator cuff repair. Stephen Jensen handles litigation across a broad spectrum of industries. Irfan Lateef has experience in ITC and federal district court proceedings.
Mayer Brown leverages its excellent trial and litigation credentials to handle patent litigation matters for clients such as Philips Electronics, DuPont Air Product Nanomaterials, Avago Technologies, Coby Electronics and Google. Alan Grimaldi and John Mancini co-chair the global IP practice. Highlights included successfully representing the defendant in Callaway Golf v Acushnet Company in district court proceedings regarding patents asserted against the client’s Pro V1 golf ball product. Brian Nolan and Lisa Ferri act for GSK in a dispute brought by Biogen and Genentech, which asserts patent infringement claims against the client’s cancer treatment drug Arzerra. The case is currently on appeal following a district court judgment of non-infringement in favor of the defendants. It also acts for the client in disputes against Genentech. Gary Hnath handles Section 337 litigation and IP litigator Theresa Gillis is also recommended. She successfully represented Valeant International in Hatch-Waxman litigation asserting patent validity for antidepressant product Aplenzin as well as obtaining an infringement verdict against Watson Pharmaceuticals.
O'Melveny & Myers LLP has broad-based litigation capabilities in federal, state and ITC court proceedings but focuses on hi-tech, electronics, telecoms and related sectors, with representative clients including Apple, Viacom, Belkin and Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics. The practice has been representing Samsung Electronics in various district court and ITC matters and also obtained a dismissal of patent claims on behalf of Google as defendant to infringement allegations brought by WebMap Technologies. It also successfully obtained dismissal of cases on behalf of DirecTV and Integrated Device Technology. IP of technology group chair Darin Snyder leads the team, which is split across the West Coast and in Washington DC. Trial lawyer George Riley and IP litigator Mark Miller are key attorneys.
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP handles high-stakes patent litigation matters across a broad range of industries. Nicholas Groombridge has ‘a unique understanding of the way people think and an ability to get a message across’. He won a district court jury trial for GE, which found the asserted patents for wind turbine technology to be valid and infringed by defendant Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and also obtained a $170m damages award. Groombridge led for Biogen in bringing patent infringement claims against competitors such as Novartis and Bayer regarding the client’s multiple sclerosis treatment Avonex, and successfully represented the defendant in Triangle v Garmin Litigation. Kenneth Gallo acts for Genentech in disputes against GSK regarding the Cabilly patents. David Ball focuses on semiconductor and related industries. John Nathan and Catherine Nyarady (‘very good with tough issues and witnesses’) obtained a favorable appeal ruling, which affirmed a lower court ruling of patent validity for Edwards Lifesciences’ transcatheter heart valve device in a case against Medtronic.
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP’s team of ‘very good lawyers with on-point technical backgrounds’, is led by Christopher Hughes, whose ‘advice and guidance in the finer and more complex corners is invaluable in those cases that you simply cannot afford to lose’. He defended AngioDynamics against patent infringement claims brought by C R Bard, as well as representing the defendant in Adaptix v AT&T in a case regarding 4G wireless technology patents. Litigator James Bailey has acted for clients across a broad range of technologies, including medical devices, electronics and hi-tech. Tony Pezzano left to join King & Spalding LLP in 2012.
Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP’s patent litigation practice has been busy in ongoing representations. Its industry coverage includes medical devices, telecoms, consumer products, biotechnology and software. It is currently representing Comcast in disputes against Sprint regarding patents for telecoms products. The team has also filed a case on behalf of Riverbed Technology against Silver Peak Systems, asserting patents for WAN optimization systems. Leading attorneys Anthony Fenwick and Matthew Lehr ‘each provide a rare combination of nuanced strategic thinking, unparalleled substantive knowledge, and superior trial skills and experience’. Representative clients include Callidus Software, VNUS Medical Technologies and Yahoo!
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP acts for high-profile technology companies such as Fujifilm, Nintendo and Microsoft in patent trial cases. It was recently co-counsel to Apple in a successful defense against an ITC investigation brought by S3 Graphics regarding patents directed towards image compression. It also obtained summary judgment of non-infringement for both NVIDIA and Canon as defendants in separate patent infringement cases. Silicon Valley-based IP co-chair Neel Chatterjee provides ‘excellent judgment and good technical depth, and is also a very good strategist’ on complex patent litigation matters. In Washington DC, fellow practice chair Steven Routh has experience in federal court and ITC proceedings.
White & Case LLP is particularly regarded for its pharmaceutical patent litigation expertise. Dimitrios Drivas successfully represented Pfizer in Hatch-Waxman litigation to defend patents for the client’s painkiller product Lyrica, with a district court verdict finding the patents valid and infringed by defendant generic drug companies. Drivas, James Trainor, Jeffrey Oelke and Adam Gahtan are all ‘advocates and litigators. They are highly responsive, knowledgeable, and professional’. In other technologies, the practice obtained a favorable outcome for Chimei Innolux in Section 337 litigation against complainant Thomson Licensing. Jack Lever, Shamita Etienne-Cummings and
David Tennant are key attorneys handling ITC cases.