• JNJ/Wyeth v. Boston Scientific (1). Invalidated all four patents-in-suit in a multibillion dollar dispute over market leading drug-coated stents.
• JNJ/Wyeth v. Boston Scientific (2). Invalidated both patents-in-suit concerning purportedly pioneering anti-proliferative drug.
• In defending a series of patent and trade secret suits and arbitrations, obtained walk-away settlement for manufacturer of miniature electronic amplifiers and pulse-width control systems.
• Hologic v. IZI. Obtained infringement verdict and subsequent permanent injunction in suit involving accessories for mammography units.
• Inflow v. Boston Scientific Corp. Won complete defense victory against an infringement claim for US$105 million involving medical device architecture patents.
• [Confidential Arbitration Claimant] v.Hologic. Defeated claim in excess of US$25 million for expansion of royalty base and term in biomedical technology license.
• Freedom Wireless, Inc. v. Verizon Wireless. Represented only victorious defendant in multi-defendant suit involving patents on telecommunications systems and equipment.
• BioMedino v. GE Healthcare. Secured summary judgment of patent invalidity against claim for US$40 million in matter involving liquid chromatography.
• Boston Scientific v. Cook/Guidant. Secured permanent injunction valued at US$5 billion precluding early entry into drug eluting stent market.
• Medical Monitoring and Paging LLC v.General Electric Company. In a suit involving telecommunications and paging patents, secured freedom to operate for a fraction of expected trial costs following summary judgment and re-examination proceedings.
• GE Healthcare v. ABI. Won judgment in excess of US$30 million in technology license dispute.
• Jang v. Boston Scientific Corp. (1). Secured summary judgment against a patent infringement claim for over US$125 million.
• Jang v. Boston Scientific Corp.(2). Defeated breach of contract claim seeking US$100 million.
• Boston Scientific v. Medtronic. Won judgment in excess of US$160 million and secured injunction against future infringing sales of catheter systems.
• Judicial Comment. Hon T. John Ward (ED Tex.) to the jury in Medtronic v. Boston Scientific (opposing counsel McKool Smith): "You've had an unusual experience in my nine years on the bench. I have never seen a case better tried by either side. So, the lawyers are to be complimented for the way they conducted themselves."
• Judicial Comment. Hon. Ronald M. Whyte (ND Cal.) to parties in Hologic v. SenoRx (opposing counsel Williams & Connolly): "I've tried a number of patent cases and this was a real pleasure. I thought this was the most professionally handled case from both sides that I've seen and it sure made it a lot easier for me, and I appreciate it."

Representative Appellate Work

• JNJ/Wyeth v. Boston Scientific. Won CAFC affirmance of judgment invalidating patents-in-suit in a multibillion dollar dispute over market-leading drug-coated stents.
• Hologic v. SenoRx. Secured CAFC vacatur of invalidity ruling following trial judgment that radiation treatment patents were infringed but invalid.
• Bonzel v. Boston Scientific. Won CAFC affirmance of estoppel-based dismissal of patent license dispute.

Representative Diligence and Counseling Activity

• Leading diligence teams, including analyzing acquisition-related intellectual property risks.
• Counseling on a range of technology/intellectual property issues, e.g., evaluating in-licensing and out-licensing strategies and implementation, developing strategies for protecting products facing imminent expiration of intellectual property rights, and analyzing client and competitor strategic portfolios pursuant to the development of long-term intellectual property enforcement and product defense plans.