Send to a friend

Mr. Wilson has extensive experience in all aspects of patent litigation at both the trial and appellate levels.  His practice focuses on litigation involving biotechnology and pharmaceutical patents, with a particular emphasis on ANDA cases under the Hatch-Waxman Act.  His clients have been at the forefront of these technologies, ranging from Fortune 500 companies to small, rapidly growing start-ups.  He has also represented clients in numerous high risk cases involving “bet the company” disputes.

Soverain v. J.C. Penney, et al. (E.D. Tex.):  Represent Soverain in patent infringement case involving shopping cart, hyperlink, and session identifier technology used for e-commerce systems.  Pending.

DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. INVISTA North America, et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented INVISTA in breach of contract, trade secret, and patent infringement case involving nylon engineering resins.  Moved for early summary judgment on contract claims following preliminary fact discovery.  Case favorably settled along with two other pending lawsuits between the parties.

YieldBoost v. Photon Dynamics and Orbotech (N.D. Cal.):  Represented Photon Dynamics and Orbotech in patent infringement case involving two patents directed to defect detection in LCD displays.  Case settled for nuisance value in light of our non-infringement and invalidity contentions.

Source Search Technologies LLC v. LendingTree LLC, IAC/InterActiveCorp, and ServiceMagic, Inc. (D.N.J.):  Represented IAC/InterActiveCorp, LendingTree, and ServiceMagic in patent litigation involving computerized referral services.  Plaintiff sought over $100 million in damages.  Obtained summary judgment of invalidity of all asserted claims.  Remanded after appeal on one claim.  Favorably settled.

EKR Therapeutics, Inc. and PDL BioPharma, Inc. v. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (D.N.J.):  Represent plaintiffs EKR and PDL in ANDA litigation involving Cardene® I.V. brand of nicardipine hydrochloride for the acute treatment of hypertension.  Obtained summary judgment of infringement.

Positive Technologies, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (E.D. Tex.):  Represented Samsung Electronics America in patent infringement case involving methods of overdriving for LCD and plasma displays used to minimize motion blurring and ghosting phenomena.  Case favorably settled for Samsung during fact discovery.

Dr. Curtis Wade and Healthkomp, Inc. v. Nobel Biocare USA, LLC (JAMS):  Represented individual inventor in arbitration involving snap-fit device used for dental implants.  Immediately following claim construction hearing, Nobel initiated discussions that resulted in favorable settlement.

Connetics Corp. et al. v. Agis Industries (1983) Ltd. (D.N.J.):  Represented plaintiff Connetics in Paragraph IV patent infringement litigation involving Olux® brand of clobetasol propionate foam.  Settled following favorable claim construction and after defendant’s motion for summary judgment of no infringement was denied.

University of California v. Monsanto (N.D. Cal.):  Represented Monsanto in a patent infringement matter when the plaintiff patentee, a local public university, alleged that our client’s recombinant bovine growth hormone product infringed its patent and sought $1.8 billion in treble damages and a permanent injunction. After we won summary judgment eliminating one of the two accused products, and limiting the literal coverage of the claims to technology “known and available” in 1980, the case settled favorably the day before the jury trial was to start.

Xcel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Kali Laboratories, Inc. (D.N.J.):  Paragraph IV patent infringement litigation in “first-to-file” opportunity for Diastat® brand of diazepam gel.  Favorable settlement provides Kali with the right to market a generic version of Diastat® and Diastat AccuDialTM three years prior to patent expiration.
 

Kos Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Kos in Paragraph IV litigation regarding Kos’ sustained release niacin product, Niaspan®.  Three related lawsuits filed over two years for infringement of four Orange Book listed patents.  Settled favorably.

Oregon Health & Science University v. Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. (D. Or.):  Represented Vertex in a declaratory judgment case involving patents related to neuroregenerative compounds.  Successfully obtained judgment on the pleadings, dismissing plaintiff’s inventorship and inequitable conduct claims.  Favorably settled for Vertex.

Texas Instruments Inc. v. Tessera, Inc. (N.D. Cal.):  Represented Tessera, Inc. in patent infringement case against Texas Instruments relating to semiconductor chip packaging.  Obtained favorable settlement for Tessera two days before trial was scheduled to begin.

George Pieczenik, et al. v. Dyax Corp. (D. Mass.):  Represented Dyax in a patent infringement case involving phage display libraries.  Successfully moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in the Southern District of New York.  Obtained summary judgment of no infringement in the District of Massachusetts.

Forest Laboratories, Inc. and ONY Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories and Tokyo Tanabe Co., Ltd. (W.D.N.Y.):  Represented Forest and ONY in a declaratory judgment case involving lung surfactants used to treat premature infants.  Obtained judgment of equitable estoppel and no infringement following a twelve-week jury trial.

Neles-Jamesbury, Inc. v. Fisher Controls Int’l, Inc. and Fisher Service Co. (D. Mass.):  Represented Fisher Controls against Neles-Jamesbury in patent infringement case involving noise attenuating valves.  Obtained jury verdict of no infringement.  Affirmed without opinion within a week after oral argument.