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
Representative Clients
-
ADTRAN
- Alcon
- Allergan
- Allied Signal
-
Allied Telesis
- Amgen
- Amoco
-
Apotex
- Apple
-
Aurobindo
-
ASUSTek
- Borg Warner
- Bionpharma
- Dow
-
Garmin
-
Hetero
- Impax
- Interdigital
- LG Electronics
- Micron
-
Micro Labs
- Mylan
- Motorola
- Netscape
- Novartis
- RadioShack
- Research in Motion
-
Sagent Pharms.
-
Sony
- Sprint
-
ZyXel
Team
News
- June 1, 2023
- October 26, 2022
- October 17, 2022
- August 18, 2022
- November 4, 2021
- October 26, 2021
- August 23, 2021
- August 19, 2021
Resources
Publications
- November 2, 2020
- October 10, 2018
- August 1, 2018
- June 6, 2016
- November 5, 2014
- August 27, 2014
- May 21, 2014
- May 21, 2012
Videos & Podcasts
- June 25, 2015