Clients’ development of their technology and protecting and enforcing clients’ intellectual property rights are the focus of Laura’s practice. Laura has litigated numerous patent infringement suits involving medical devices, electronic components and imaging technology. She prosecutes patents in the chemical and biotechnology fields and has a technical background in chemistry, including organic and analytical chemistry. Prior to joining Harris Beach, Laura supported the in-house Patent Prosecution Department at Motorola.
RECENT PUBLICATIONS + SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
- Presented patent CLE webinar "Update: Written Description and Enablement Requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 112", September 2020
- Speaker at AIPLA Annual Meeting 2018: Regulatory and IP Issues for Immunotherapies Including Car-T and Antibody Technologies (“Don’t Put The “Car-T” Before the Horse—IP And Regulatory Issues for Immunotherapies”), BIOTECHNOLOGY/FOOD AND DRUG/TRADE SECRET LAW (JOINT SESSION), presented talk on Resolving Patent Infringement Issues for Biosimilars/ Interchangeable Biologics
- “The Supreme Court Interprets the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act in Favor of Biosimilar Applicants,” American Intellectual Property Law Association Biotech Buzz, June 2017
- Speaker, “USPTO’s Subject Matter Eligibility: The Dos and Dont’s in 2017 and Beyond,”
The Knowledge Group, March 20, 2017
- Patent Damages Webinar: Discussed the current state of case law on patent damages, including cases on the entire market value rule and apportionment. The webinar also discussed strategies for motion practice prior to trial, including Daubert and summary judgment motions, and how to marshal the proof to support your client’s theory of damages, including the use of expert testimony. November 2016
- ACI, Women Leaders in Technology Law, "Creating a Winning Pitch: Implementing Critical Negotiation, Leadership, and Presentation Skills to Make Your Case," May 15, 2015
Laura has published countless articles and written Harris Beach Legal Alerts on a wide range of patent and trademark topics in a number of technical fields, including:
- “Examples in Specification Did Not Provide Written Description Support for Bounded or Closed Ranges,” December 2021.
- "Patent Trial and Appeal Board Determination of "Reasonable Expectation of Success" Must Be Supported by Substantial Evidence," December 2021.
- "Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Reverses $1.2 Billion Verdict in Juno v. Kite Pharma, Invalidating Genus Claims to a Three-Part Chimeric Antigen Receptor," September 2021.
- "Federal Appeals Court Hears Arguments on CAR T-Cell Therapy Patent Dispute," Harris Beach Podcast, July 2021.
- "IBSA v. Teva: Indefinite Scope of Key Term in Patent Description Rendered a Thyroid Medication Patent Invalid Under Section 112," Harris Beach Legal Alert, September 2020
- Samsung v. Apple: Supreme Court’s Reversal of the Design Patent Damages Award, December 2016
- "Will Nanotechnology Products be Impacted by the Federal Courts' 'Product of Nature' Exception to Subject-Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. 101?," The John Marshall Law School Review Of Intellectual Property Law, April 2014
- “Using the Term ‘The Invention’ to Describe the Preferred Embodiments May Limit the Claims,” Intellectual Property Today, March 2014
- “Extending the Terms of Patents,” Harris Beach Legal Alert, February 2010
Laura has also published numerous articles for American Intellectual Property Law Association’s Biotech Buzz newsletter, including:
- AbbVie Files Suit Against Amgen Asserting Patent Infringement by Amgen's Biosimilar to AbbVie's HUMIRA® Biologic. October 2016
- Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc.: United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Finds that Apotex Pegfilgrastim and Filgrastim Biosimilars Do Not Infringe Amgen's Patent on Protein Refolding. September 2016
- U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware Holds that Discovery under the Biologic Price Competition and Innovation Act is Limited to Information Relevant to the Patents Asserted in the Litigation.
- Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc.: Federal Circuit Holds that 180-Day Notice Must be Given After Biosimilar is Licensed Even if the Biosimilar Applicant Complies with the Information-Exchange Procedures of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act. July 2016
- Amgen Sues Sandoz for Patent Infringement Over Pegfilgrastim Biosimilar. May 2016