Katten provides intellectual property litigation services to biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. Our attorneys bring a wealth of legal and technical experience to bear on issues ranging from defending allegations of patent infringement to asserting our clients’ patents. Our team of experienced litigators has represented both generic and brand companies in ANDA litigation as well as litigation of biologics.
Members of our litigation team have PhD’s and master’s degrees, which ensures our technical understanding of the areas involved in the litigation. As a result, we maximize the value of our clients’ intellectual property assets and set the stage for continuing technological and business development, expansion and goal achievement.
We pursue litigation with a mind toward our clients’ overall business goals. We have leveraged the positions and arguments developed through litigation to achieve a number of settlements and licenses with beneficial terms for our clients—such as early entry to the market or a low royalty rate. We do not rush into litigation without considering the risks and potential rewards. We recognize that in certain situations, taking a primary role in a dispute is not warranted given the potential benefit of a victory. In such matters, we have recommended and negotiated litigation stays and dismissals without prejudice.
While we always look for ways to resolve a case by agreement, we also have the requisite experience and skill to litigate through trial and appeal. Our team includes a former Assistant U.S. Attorney who served as lead prosecutor on dozens of jury and bench trials.
The Katten team was successful in two of the leading cases in the pharmaceutical patent field. In Pfizer v. Apotex, Inc., 480 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2007), we represented Apotex in an ANDA litigation relating to Pfizer’s billion-dollar drug Norvasc®. In that case, we secured a decision invalidating the patent, which allowed Apotex to enter the market with a generic version of the drug.
In Daiichi Sankyo Co. v. Apotex, Inc., 501 F.3d 1254 (Fed. Cir. 2007), we represented Apotex in an ANDA litigation relating to Daiichi’s antibiotic ear medication, Floxin Otic®. In that case, we secured a decision invalidating the patent, which allowed Apotex to enter the market with a generic version of the drug. Further, after the appellate decision, we secured $5,000,000 in damages from Daiichi because Daiichi had originally obtained a wrongful injunction against Apotex.