Michael P. Kahn
Michael is an experienced trial lawyer who focuses his practice on patent and trade secret litigation and advising clients concerning intellectual property strategy. He is experienced in all aspects of intellectual property litigation, from discovery through trial and appeal. Michael’s litigation and trial experience spans a variety of technologies, including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, software, consumer products and electrical, chemical, computer science and mechanical engineering.
During law school, Michael was an intern for the Honorable Marjorie O. Rendell at the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
- TravelClick, Inc. v. Variant Holdings, LLC, et al. (W.D.Wis.); Variant Holdings, LLC, et al. v. TravelClick, Inc. (E.D.Tex): Currently represent TravelClick in a series of litigations on multiple fronts concerning internet booking engines and e-commerce. The cases are at various stages of discovery with the earliest cases set for trial in late 2013.
- Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Dow Pharmaceutical Sciences, Inc. v. River’s Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC (N.D. Ga.): Currently represent plaintiffs in ANDA litigation concerning topical gel for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Trial is scheduled for Spring 2014.
- Intendis GmbH et al. v. Glenmark Generics Ltd et al. (D.Del.): Currently represent plaintiffs in ANDA litigation concerning medication used to treat rosacea, acne and other skin irritations.
- Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics Inc. v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (E.D. Tex.): Represented Pfizer in a patent infringement case concerning recombinant Factor VIII protein used to treat hemophilia A patients. The case settled.
- SPRI Partners, LLC v. TravelClick, Inc. (N.D. Ill.): Currently represent TravelClick as lead counsel in a breach of contract/quasi-contract case concerning software and systems for TravelClick’s internet booking engine.
- Suzanne Jaffe Stillman v. Bayer HealthCare LLC, et al. (C.D. Cal.) Represented Bayer in a patent infringement action concerning dietary supplements containing fiber, water and “encapsulated” probiotics. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed with prejudice all direct infringement claims after the court granted our motion to dismiss all claims for indirect infringement.
- Roche Diagnostics Operations Inc. and Corange Int’l. Ltd. v. Nova Biomedical Corp., et al (D.Del.): Currently represent Nova in a patent infringement case involving two patents relating to blood glucose test strips asserted by Roche Diagnostics.
- AstraZeneca LP et al. v. Breath Ltd., Apotex Corp and Apotex Inc., and Sandoz, Inc. (D.N.J.): Represented AstraZeneca in ANDA litigation and 7-week trial involving pediatric asthma drug, PULMICORT RESPULES®, and patents concerning methods of treatment and sterilized compositions.
- Merit Industries, Inc. v. JVL Corporation: Represented JVL over the course of a five-year case in which Merit alleged JVL’s entire product line infringed three Merit patents. A federal jury found that none of JVL’s current products infringed any Merit patent, invalidated many of the asserted claims and denied Merit’s demand for lost profits, awarding instead only a token sum (less than seven percent of what was sought) for reasonable royalties for infringement by a subset of JVL’s past products.
- Analog Devices, Inc. v. Linear Technology Corporation; Represented Linear Technology in a patent infringement action relating to various patents on analog integrated circuitry. Along with denying that it had infringed any of Analog’s three asserted patents, our client counterclaimed for patent infringement based on eight of Linear’s U.S. patents. We settled the matter favorably for our client.
- VLT, Inc. v. Lucent Technologies, Inc.: Represented Lucent in a patent infringement action concerning a patent related to voltage regulator circuits. We settled the matter favorably for our client.
- New York Super Lawyers – Rising Stars (2012)
- Co-author, “Patent Drafting and Prosecution: The Intrinsic Record and its Impact on Patent Litigation,” PLI Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2013 (March 1, 2013)
- Co-author, “Bowman v. Monsanto: If Bowman Wins, Monsanto and Bowman Lose,” Bloomberg BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (February 15, 2013)
- Quoted, “Supreme Court to Mull Extent of Patent Protection for Monsanto Branded Seed,” The Litigation Daily (February 15, 2013)
- Quoted, “High Court Could Limit Patent Rights In Monsanto Case,” Law360 (February 11, 2013)
- Michael Kahn and Beth Finkelstein “A Court Still Divided on Joint Infringement,” Intellectual Property Today (October 2012); article republished PLI Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2013 (April 2013)
- Michael Kahn and Justin Colannino “Uncertainty For Computer-Based Means-Plus-Function Claims,” Law360 (September 24, 2012)
- “Federal Circuit Refines 'Induced Infringement' Theory to Revive Akamai and McKesson Suits,” The AmLaw Litigation Daily (August 31, 2012)
- “Fed. Circ. Makes Induced Infringement Easier To Prove,” Law360 (August 31, 2012)
- Michael Kahn and Beth Finkelstein “Innovation and Differentiation in Life Sciences—The Public Interest Factor in the Injunction Analysis,” Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (August 2012)
- Michael Kahn and Beth Finkelstein, “A Divided Court on the Issue of Joint Infringement,” Intellectual Property Today (April 2012); article republished IP Frontline (May 2012); article republished PLI Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2013 (April 2013)
- Presenter, “Divided Infringement Update,” IPMC Financial Services Roundtable (April 11, 2012)