IP Spotlight

		Lisa Kole
		Dr. Lisa B. Kole is a partner in the New York office of Baker Botts.  She started her career at Baker Botts in 1993. Dr. Kole has extensive experience in intellectual property law in the life sciences area. Her expertise includes assessment of patents for investment value, and building portfolios through patent prosecution and licensing. Dr. Kole graduated in 1986 from the combined M.D./Ph.D. program of The Rockefeller University/Cornell Medical College, where her studies focused on molecular biology, virology, and immunology. She is a licensed medical doctor, and completed a general medicine internship at Westchester County Medical Center and a one-year residency in neurology at The New York Hospital/Cornell Medical Center. Dr. Kole then worked as a scientific advisor at a New York law firm specializing in biotechnology, attending Fordham University School of Law at night. After graduating in 1993, she became an associate at Baker Botts, where she became a partner in 1999. Dr. Kole's practice incorporates patent procurement, patent audits, written opinions regarding patentability, patent validity, infringement, and freedom to operate, and licensing in the life sciences. She has worked with clients to manage their portfolio in areas such as cancer therapies and diagnostics; antiviral therapies; immunotherapeutics; screening assays; bioinformatics; antimicrobial medical devices; strategic drug design based on the crystal structure of proteins; and molecular tagging. She also has worked with clients to perform due diligence reviews on potential investment targets.

Articles

Star Fruits v. United States: Federal Circuit Endorses The Patent Office’s Broad Authority To Demand Supplemental Or Ancillary Information From A Patent Applicant

Corey Tumey

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the “Federal Circuit”) has recently provided additional guidance on the scope of information a United States Patent Examiner may request from an applicant for a patent in a Requirement For Information under 37 C.F.R. § 1.105. In Star Fruits v. United States, No. 04-1160, 2005 WL 11560 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 3, 2005), the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s summary judgment ruling that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) did not act unlawfully when it deemed a patent application abandoned when the applicant failed to respond to an Examiner’s Requirement For Information under 37 C.F.R. § 1.105.Read More...

Trintec Industries v. Pedre Promotional Products, Inc. And The Still-Evolving Rules For Establishing Personal Jurisdiction In Patent Cases Based On Website “Presence” In A Forum

Thomas Frame

On January 19, 2005 the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the “Federal Circuit”) decided the case of Trintec Industries, Inc. v. Pedre Promotional Products, Inc., No. 04-1293, slip op. at 1 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 19, 2005),1 which dealt with an interesting issue of personal jurisdiction. The case began when Trintec sued Pedre for patent infringement in the District of Columbia. Trintec accused Pedre of infringing two of Trintec’s patents that relate to an automation technique for making printed faces used in clocks and watches. Pedre responded to the complaint by moving to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Pedre also asserted that venue was improper in the District of Columbia. In support of its defense, Pedre provided a declaration that attested to the fact that its sole office and place of business was in New York and, further, that it had no facilities or representatives in Washington D.C. The district court granted Pedre’s motion and dismissed the complaint based on a lack of personal jurisdiction. See Trintec Indus., Inc. v. Pedre Promotional Prods., Inc., No. 1:03-CV-01267-RCL (D.D.C. Mar. 25, 2004). Trintec appealed to the Federal Circuit.Read More...