Biotechnology, Chemical, and Pharmaceutical

Overview

Our Biotechnology, Chemical, and Pharmaceutical team helps clients leverage their intellectual property assets to create maximum revenue and growth, along with a distinct competitive edge. BakerHostetler's experience covers an extensive array of industries encompassed within the chemical arts field, including both life sciences and industrial chemical applications. Our attorneys develop a thorough understanding of a client's specific technologies and overall business strategy, and assist them in outlining and implementing a proprietary rights strategy with a global perspective. We work with our clients to maximize the value of portfolios proactively, handling everything from portfolio management, licensing, and planning to litigation avoidance, third-party diligence, and evaluation issues.

Pharmaceutical

We handle all types of pharmaceutical products whether the product is a small molecule, biological, or combination drug and device invention, including formulations, delivery systems, and isomerisms. Our attorneys also vigorously enforce and defend clients' patent and exclusivity rights, through litigation, arbitration, or mediation whenever necessary.

Our client list includes large corporations, emerging pharmaceutical companies, and nonprofit institutions. Among our clients are Johnson & Johnson, Celgene, Amgen, Morphotek (now a part of Eisai), Cephalon (now a part of Teva), and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Most of our attorneys have advanced degrees and backgrounds in the life sciences, making us proficient in every area of pharmaceutical technology from molecular biology, nucleic acid therapeutics, and genetics to small molecule NDEs, delivery devices and systems, treatment regimes, and combination platforms. We are as comfortable dealing with diagnostic arrays, stem cell technologies, immunology, and drug delivery vehicles as we are with classical pharmaceutical formulations.

In addition, we have extensive experience in Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDA).

More »
Chemical

The chemical arts are inherent in a wide variety of industry sectors. BakerHostetler enhances the patent position of companies involved in making or selling industrial chemicals, ceramics, agricultural chemicals, drug delivery depots, small molecules, polymers, metal coatings, alloys, petrochemicals, personal care products, paints, medical implants, electronics, food products, and adhesives.

We counsel startups and smaller companies on ways to educate their scientists of patent law basics, developing patent and trademark portfolio strategies, surveying the competitive landscape, and staking out their territories. We also frequently assist in licensing the technology and, in some instances, navigating the federal regulatory pathways. Our attorneys advise large clients on how to handle the prosecution of specific cases or patent families that are particularly important or complex, or that require specific expertise.

Biotechnology

We have significant expertise and experience in the field of biotechnology and related biochemistry arts. Many of our firm's biotechnology lawyers hold advanced degrees in areas such as immunology, genetics, biochemistry, and molecular biology, as well as previously holding positions in the field as diverse as bench scientists, medical professionals, and corporate and university counsel. Their analyses and counseling are based upon substantial experience in biotechnology combined with a real understanding of business needs.

We represent a diverse group of clients, including many Fortune 500 pharmaceutical/biotech companies and universities in industries as diverse as biologic therapeutics, pharmaceuticals, plant and cell biology, food and agricultural sciences, and nanotechnology. We work with clients to develop a global patent strategy tailored to their unique needs that helps to ensure success in a competitive marketplace.

In addition to helping our clients obtain effective patent protection, we offer a full range of services encompassing patent enforcement and client counseling, including evaluation of patent validity, infringement, and freedom to operate. We assist clients in structuring agreements related to financing, licensing, and collaborative research, and also advise them on overcoming regulatory hurdles and protecting and exploiting patent rights.

We provide intellectual property strategy and planning services, opinions, clearance and right-to-use studies, U.S. and foreign patent preparation and prosecution, appeals, and, where appropriate, application guidance through reexamination or reissue and post-grant proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Select Experience

  • Represented the licenser of a breakthrough technology that provides rapid access to large numbers of genetically divergent organism lines, whereby several important technologies were retained by the owner and others were licensed to a major biotech enterprise, permitting much more effective exploitation of a proprietary portfolio.
  • Counseled numerous makers of pharmaceuticals and biologicals on patent issues attendant to FDA registration activities, assisting in navigating the difficult terrain surrounding Orange Book issues and ANDA challenges.
  • Evaluated, planned, and executed a landmark series of patent applications related to the distribution of teratogenically and otherwise dangerous pharmaceuticals that permit access to the pharmaceutical benefits while avoiding dangerous misdelivery of the drugs.
  • Successfully obtained dismissed of infringement claims based on administration of Hepatitis B vaccines in Classen Immunotherapies Inc. v. Biogen IDEC et al., CA WDQ 04-2607 (D. Md.).
  • Represented Phoenix Pharmacologics in litigation relating to the inventorship of PEGylated forms of arginine deiminase. Enzon Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Phoenix Pharmacologics Inc., 04-1285 (D. Del).
  • Successfully represented Cephalon Inc. in interference proceeding before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office concerning patents assigned to Genentech and Neuronz relating to the treatment of neural damage or disease using an insulin-like growth factor. Gluckman v. Lewis, Interference No. 104,553 (Bd. Patent App. and Interferences).
More »

Professionals

Name Title Office Email
Partner Washington, D.C.
Partner Philadelphia
Associate Atlanta
Counsel Washington, D.C.
Partner Philadelphia
Associate Philadelphia
Counsel Atlanta
Partner Philadelphia
Associate Cincinnati
Associate Philadelphia
Partner Philadelphia
Associate Philadelphia
Partner Washington, D.C.
Counsel Philadelphia
Associate Philadelphia
Associate Philadelphia
Partner Cincinnati
Counsel Washington, D.C.
Partner Costa Mesa
Of Counsel Philadelphia
Partner Philadelphia
Partner Philadelphia
Partner Philadelphia
Partner Philadelphia
Partner Washington, D.C.
Partner Atlanta
Partner Philadelphia
Partner Philadelphia
Partner Denver

Experience

  • Represented the licenser of a breakthrough technology that provides rapid access to large numbers of genetically divergent organism lines, whereby several important technologies were retained by the owner and others were licensed to a major biotech enterprise, permitting much more effective exploitation of a proprietary portfolio.
  • Counseled numerous makers of pharmaceuticals and biologicals on patent issues attendant to FDA registration activities, assisting in navigating the difficult terrain surrounding Orange Book issues and ANDA challenges.
  • Evaluated, planned, and executed a landmark series of patent applications related to the distribution of teratogenically and otherwise dangerous pharmaceuticals that permit access to the pharmaceutical benefits while avoiding dangerous misdelivery of the drugs.
  • Successfully obtained dismissed of infringement claims based on administration of Hepatitis B vaccines in Classen Immunotherapies Inc. v. Biogen IDEC et al., CA WDQ 04-2607 (D. Md.).
  • Represented Phoenix Pharmacologics in litigation relating to the inventorship of PEGylated forms of arginine deiminase. Enzon Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Phoenix Pharmacologics Inc., 04-1285 (D. Del).
  • Successfully represented Cephalon Inc. in interference proceeding before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office concerning patents assigned to Genentech and Neuronz relating to the treatment of neural damage or disease using an insulin-like growth factor. Gluckman v. Lewis, Interference No. 104,553 (Bd. Patent App. and Interferences).

Recognition

  • Chambers USA
    • Intellectual Property ‒ Ohio (2011 to 2020)
    • Intellectual Property ‒ Georgia (2017 to 2020)
    • Intellectual Property ‒ Pennsylvania (2007 to 2020)
    • Intellectual Property: Litigation ‒ District of Columbia (2015 to 2019)
    • Intellectual Property: Patent Prosecution ‒ District of Columbia (2015 to 2019)
    • Intellectual Property: Trademark & Copyright ‒ New York (2014 to 2020)
  • The Legal 500 United States
    • Intellectual Property – Copyright (2015 to 2020)
    • Intellectual Property – Patent Litigation: Full Coverage (2015 to 2020)
    • Intellectual Property – Patents: Prosecution (Including Re-Examination and Post-Grant Proceedings) (2015 to 2020)
    • Intellectual property – Trade Secrets (Litigation and Non-Contentious Matters) (2017 to 2020)
    • Intellectual property – Trademarks: Non-Contentious (Including Prosecution, Portfolio Management and Licensing) (2019, 2020)
  • Daily Report Intellectual Property Litigation Department of the Year (2017)
  • IAM Patent 1000 ‒ DC Metro Area (2015 to 2020); Georgia (2019, 2020); Illinois (2019, 2020); Pennsylvania (2015 to 2020); Washington (2015 to 2020)
  • WTR 1000 – The World's Leading Trademark Professionals ‒ Firm and attorney rankings (2013 to 2020)
  • U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms”
    • Copyright Law: National (2012 to 2020); Atlanta (2019, 2020); New York (2018 to 2020); Philadelphia (2014 to 2020)
    • Intellectual Property Law – Orlando (2011 to 2020)
    • Litigation – Intellectual Property: National (2012 to 2020); Chicago (2019, 2020); Cincinnati (2012 to 2020); Cleveland (2012 to 2020); Columbus (2017 to 2020); Houston (2018 to 2020); New York (2012 to 2020); Costa Mesa (2013 to 2020); Orlando (2012 to 2020); Philadelphia (2014 to 2020); Washington, D.C. (2017 to 2020)
    • Litigation – Patent: National (2014 to 2020); Chicago (2019, 2020); Cincinnati (2012 to 2020); Cleveland (2014 to 2020); Houston (2018, 2019); Philadelphia (2014 to 2020); Washington, D.C. (2014 to 2020)
    • Patent Law: National (2012 to 2020); Atlanta (2016 to 2020); Chicago (2020); Cincinnati (2012 to 2020); Philadelphia (2014 to 2020); Seattle (2017 to 2020); Washington, D.C. (2013 to 2020)
    • Trademark Law: National (2015 to 2020); Cleveland (2017 to 2020); New York (2017 to 2020); Philadelphia (2014 to 2020); Washington, D.C. (2017 to 2020)
  • Recognized as one of the top law firms for client service, BakerHostetler was named to the 2020 BTI Client Service 30 for the sixth consecutive year.

Blog

In The Blogs

Previous Next
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
The USPTO Harmonizes the Indefiniteness Standard Used for AIA Trials Making it More Difficult to Find a Claim Indefinite
By Fabian M. Koenigbauer
January 14, 2021
Recently, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a memorandum to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) requiring the PTAB to change the standard used to assess the definiteness requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112 for...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Election Ballot Verification – A Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis
By Gabriel T. Applegate
January 12, 2021
In light of recent events, technologies directed toward verifying voter ballots may sound like attractive investment opportunities. However, potential investors often seek to ensure a technology is protected by one or more valid patents...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Copyright Claims Board To Be Established; Criminal Streaming Law
By Deborah A. Wilcox
December 23, 2020
Congress passed an act on Monday as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2021 that included the COVID-19 relief bill, expected to signed by President Trump, which will establish a voluntary dispute resolution process in the...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Congress Passes the Trademark Modernization Act
By Deborah A. Wilcox
December 23, 2020
On Monday as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2021 that included the COVID-19 relief package, Congress passed the Trademark Modernization Act, which President Trump is expected to sign. With respect to trademark infringement...
Read More ->
IP Intelligence: Insight on Intellectual Property
Assessing Risks in a Deal, How to Partner with Your Business Team
December 10, 2020
Businesses are not stagnant, and products change both in name and content. Brands are acquired as part of an acquisition, lines are extended in licenses, product lines are extended as businesses change. How do attorneys work with their...
Read More ->