Wanda D. French-Brown Partner

An accomplished patent litigation attorney, Wanda is creative, analytical and able to focus on the overall picture to develop litigation strategies that align with her clients’ business objectives. Wanda has represented clients involved in patent infringement matters in federal courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission, and Patent Trial and Appeals Board.

She represents clients in a range of technologies, including wireless communication and mobile devices, LCD and LED technology, biotechnology, medical devices, healthcare diagnostics, and pharmaceuticals with a concentration in Hatch-Waxman litigation.

With a decade of experience working as a registered pharmacist in the healthcare and pharmaceutical fields, Wanda is well-versed in Food and Drug Administration guidelines created by the Hatch-Waxman and Biologics Price Competition and Innovation acts, which are crucial to the entry of generic and biosimilar pharmaceutical products. Wanda counsels pharmaceutical clients about the scope and coverage of patents, new drug product exclusivity and litigation strategies related to Paragraph IV certifications filed under the Hatch-Waxman Act.

Experience

Represented an American pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman ANDA patent litigation involving its Sprycel® brand kinase inhibitor products. The court adopted proposed constructions for all 15 terms in dispute. The case resulted in a favorable settlement for the client. Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Apotex (D.N.J.)

Represented a leading multinational technology corporation in a Section 337 proceeding before the U.S. International Trade Commission in a patent infringement action involving LTE and 3GPP technology, which resulted in a favorable settlement. In the Matter of Certain Wireless Communication Equipment and Articles Therein (ITC)

Represented the Complainant in a Section 337 proceeding before the U.S. International Trade Commission in a patent infringement action involving Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) technology. Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices, including Monitors, Televisions, and Modules and Components (ITC)

Represented an American pharmaceutical company in patent infringement action involving pharmaceutical products for the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection. Obtained a claim construction ruling in favor of the client, which resulted in a win on summary judgment for infringement. Gilead Sciences Inc. v. Merck & Co. Inc., et al. (N.D. Cal.)

Represented a Defendant in a Section 337 proceedings before the U.S. International Trade Commission in a patent infringement action involving LED (Light Emitting Diode) technology and products.  Certain Light-Emitting Diode Products, Systems, and Components Thereof (ITC)

Represented an international based pharmaceutical company in a patent litigation involving Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) diagnostic testing kits.

Represented a British pharmaceutical company in patent infringement litigation involving its Paxil® brand antidepressant products, which resulted in a favorable settlement.

Represented a U.S.-based pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman ANDA patent litigation involving its Clarinex® brand antihistamine products against 21 generic defendants. Obtained consent judgments with injunctions against all defendants. In Re: Desloratadine Patent Litigation (D. N.J.)

Represented a British pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman ANDA patent litigation involving formulation patents covering its branded topical corticosteroid products.

Represented a Japanese pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman ANDA patent litigation involving formulation patents covering its branded cholesterol-lowering products.

Represented a medical device manufacturer in defense of patent infringement involving fiberoptic intra-aortic balloon catheters and pumps. Developed a pretrial strategy that resulted in a favorable settlement agreement shortly after serving invalidity contentions and before the start of fact discovery.

Represented TC Heartland in inter partes review petitions before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office while concurrently defending TC Heartland in a district court patent infringement action and a writ of mandamus appeal before the Federal Circuit. Kraft Food Groups LLC v. TC Heartland LLC (D. Del.)

Represented a leading multinational technology corporation in defense of patent infringement, involving semiconductor technology, and won summary judgment of invalidity where, after an unfavorable re-examination decision on patent validity, all defendants except the client settled out of the case.

Represented a financial services company in defense of patent infringement involving its prepaid card products. Won on summary judgment of non-infringement and invalidity.

  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, BS, College of Pharmacy
  • Seton Hall University School of Law, JD, Intellectual Property Law Concentration, Impact Litigation (Appellate) Clinic, magna cum laude

International Trade Commission Trial Lawyers Association

New York Intellectual Property Law Association

American Bar Association: Intellectual Property Section

New York City Bar Association

Minorities in the Profession Committee, 2015-2019

Diversity Pipeline Initiatives Committee. 2013-2014

New Jersey Intellectual Property Law Association

National LGBT Bar Association

  • Speaker, Webinar: New Frontiers in Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation, October 11, 2017
  • Speaker, Webinar: What TC Heartland Means for Your Business: Practical Strategies for the Next Era of Patent Litigation, July 29, 2017
  • Moderator, Panel Discussion, Career Insights From Successful Diverse IP Attorneys, New York City Bar, November 9, 2016
  • New Jersey
  • New York
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey

Named to “New York Super Lawyers Rising Stars,” Mergers & Acquisitions, Super Lawyers, Thomson Reuters, 2016-2018

National Black Lawyers: Top 40 Under 40 (2015)

  • Author, "A Tale of Two Supreme Court Cases," Bloomberg Law, November 5, 2018
  • Author, "The ITC’s Potential Role in Hatch-Waxman Litigation," LAW360, April 29, 2017
  • Author, "What TC Heartland Could Mean For Venue In ANDA Cases," LAW360, February 7, 2017
  • Author, "How the new Patent Trial and Appeal Board rules impact the practice of inter partes reviews," Pharmaceutical Patent Analyst, Vol. 5, No. 5, August 20, 2016
  • Author, "TC Heartland’s Restraints On ANDA Litigation Jurisdiction," LAW360, March 30, 2016
Back to top