Delaware Intellectual Property Law

Overview

Morris James has a defense-based intellectual property practice headed by Ken Dorsney, a registered patent attorney. We have earned our reputation based on decades of success in hundreds of trials, working for and with some of the biggest firms and clients nationwide, acting as counsel in litigation concerning patents, copyrights, trade secret, trademarks, and antitrust dispute cases.

Our particular experience and knowledge of the Delaware courts, procedures, and laws make us an invaluable resource for cases that file in Delaware, most notably to patent defendants. We represent clients in a broad range of industries, including pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, automotive, biomedical, electronics, internet, and software development.

In 2019, our intellectual property practice defended the highest volume of patent accusations in the US District Courts, ranking #1 nationally in the Docket Navigator's Year in Review 2019 report and earning Ken Dorsney the title of “Top Attorney for Patent Challengers.”

Ken Dorsney is particularly regarded for his work in generic pharmaceuticals litigation, recently serving as Editor-in-Chief and co-author for the Third Edition of ANDA Litigation: Strategies and Tactics for Pharmaceutical Patent Litigators, published by the American Bar Association.

Morris James’ Intellectual Property practice of today builds on the firm’s long history of advocacy in patent, trademark, trade secret, and copyright disputes by previous partners including Judge Jurden, Dick Kirk, Richard Herrmann, and Mary Matterer.

Our client commitment and responsiveness is demonstrated by our decades-long relationships with clients and co-counsel. We are a nimble but formidable team, offering superior legal ability, scientific knowledge, and client service to both patent owners and challengers in these highly technical disputes.

Electronic Discovery

eDiscovery is an evolving field that goes beyond technology into multiple legal, security, and privacy issues. Morris James attorneys have taken leadership roles in this area and have developed a system employed firm-wide for a seamless and efficient eDiscovery system. We have participated in the drafting of the Delaware District Court Default Standards, as well as eDiscovery rules and guidelines in the other Delaware Courts.

Efficiencies of Technology

Morris James embraces technology as readily as our clients, and we continually refine our technology in order to improve our service to clients.

Working at the forefront of Delaware’s legal community, we are early adopters of a virtually paperless workflow, litigation management tools and technologically-enhanced courtroom presentations. Our IP attorneys and staff provide clients with around-the-clock case support, including filing with the Court.

Using our internally-developed IP Litigation Database, our attorneys offer valuable information to assist in determining how and when a judge could be expected to rule on a particular issue. As a result, our attorneys are better able to assist in expediting matters and adding value to the litigation team.

Electronic Discovery

eDiscovery is an evolving field that goes beyond technology into multiple legal, security, and privacy issues. Morris James attorneys have taken leadership roles in this area and have developed a system employed firm-wide for a seamless and efficient eDiscovery system. We have participated in the drafting of the Delaware District Court Default Standards, as well as eDiscovery rules and guidelines in the other Delaware Courts.

Efficiencies of Technology

Morris James embraces technology as readily as our clients, and we continually refine our technology in order to improve our service to clients.

Working at the forefront of Delaware’s legal community, we are early adopters of a virtually paperless workflow, litigation management tools and technologically-enhanced courtroom presentations. Our IP attorneys and staff provide clients with around-the-clock case support, including filing with the Court.

Using our internally-developed IP Litigation Database, our attorneys offer valuable information to assist in determining how and when a judge could be expected to rule on a particular issue. As a result, our attorneys are better able to assist in expediting matters and adding value to the litigation team.

Recent Matters

ADTRAN, Inc. v. TQ Delta, LLC:
Patent Infringement - DSL technology

Amgen Inc. v. Hetero USA Inc., et al.
Patent Infringement – ANDA

Apple Inc. v. High Tech Computer Corp.
Patent infringement – telecommunications

Asahi Glass Co. Ltd., et al. v. Guardian Industries Corp.
Patent infringement – display technologies

AstraZeneca AB v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., et al.
Patent Infringement - ANDA

Bayer Intellectual Property GMBH, et al. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., et al.
ANDA

Blackbird Tech LLC v. Garmin Ltd., et al.
Patent Infringement –activity tracker technology

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., et al. v. Bionpharma, Inc.
Patent Infringement – ANDA

Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Sagent Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Patent Infringement – ANDA

Forest Laboratories, LLC, et al. v. Apotex Inc., et al.
Patent Infringement –ANDA

Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC, et al. v. Sagent Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Patent Infringement – ANDA

Genuine Enabling Technology LLC v. Sony Corp., et al.
Patent Infringement –user import devices and video game console systems

Impax Laboratories, Inc. v. Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Patent Infringement-ANDA

LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp
Patent infringement – refrigerator technology

Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc.
Patent infringement – biomedical technologies

Memory Integrity, LLC v. ASUSTek Computer, Inc., et al.
Patent Infringement – computer system technologies

MobileMedia Ideas LLC v. Apple Inc.
Patent infringement – telecommunications

Neev v. Abbott Medical Optics Inc.
Patent infringement – biomedical technologies

Novartis Vaccines & Diagnostics Inc. v. MedImmune LLC, et al.
Patent infringement – biomedical technologies

Onyx Therapeutics, Inc. v. Sagent Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Patent Infringement – ANDA

Pfizer Inc., et al. v. Micro Labs USA Inc., et al.
Patent Infringement – ANDA

Shionogi Pharma Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Patent infringement – ANDA

SRI International v. Symantec Corporation
Patent infringement – internet security

Starhome GmbH v. AT&T Mobility LLC, et al.
Patent infringement - telecommunications

TQ Delta, LLC v. ZyXel Communications, Inc., et al.
Patent Infringement – DSL technology

UCB, Inc., et al. v. Apotex, Corp. and Apotex, Inc.
Patent Infringement – ANDA

Wyeth LLC, et al. v. Apotex Inc., et al.
Patent Infringement – ANDA