Source: https://www.fr.com/deanna-j-reichel/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 02:25:32+00:00

Document:
Deanna J. Reichel is a Principal in the Twin Cities office of Fish & Richardson P.C. She is a member of the firm’s pharmaceutical litigation group and has extensive experience in Hatch-Waxman and other life sciences cases, from the due diligence phase through trial. Deanna has worked on matters involving a wide variety of pharmaceutical compounds, formulations, and treatment methods for conditions such as glaucoma, hair loss, angina, and hepatitis C virus. She has been involved in the trials of these cases in many different venues across the United States, including in the Eastern District of Texas, the District of Delaware, the District of New Jersey, and the Northern District of California.
Deanna is also an active member of the firm’s appellate group and has worked on numerous Federal Circuit appeals, as well as appeals to the Supreme Court, and regularly leads the briefing on these appeals.
Deanna also serves as the firm’s recruiting principal for the Twin Cities office and works in that role to advance the firm’s diversity and inclusion programs and efforts.
Prior to joining the firm, Deanna served as a law clerk for the Honorable Raymond Clevenger, III, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (2002-2003).
Named to “Top 250 Women in Litigation” list by Benchmark Litigation in 2018.
Gilead Sciences v. Merck & Co, Inc. et al. (N.D. Cal.): Trial and appellate counsel for Gilead in action over Gilead’s revolutionary Hepatitis C drugs, Harvoni and Sovaldi. Fish won a unanimous Federal Circuit opinion that affirmed its June 2016 post-trial wipe-out of a $200 million jury verdict. Read about this historic win here and here.
Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.., et al (E.D. Tex.): Trial and appellate counsel for plaintiff in Hatch-Waxman action over ANDAs for glaucoma drug LUMIGAN® 0.01. Patents found infringed and not invalid, and injunction entered against generic entry in 2014. Affirmed by Federal Circuit on appeal.
Prometheus Laboratories v. Mayo Collaborative Services (S.D. Cal.): Appellate counsel for defendants in patent infringement action over metabolite assays for thiopurine drugs. After Federal Circuit reversed a summary judgment of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Supreme Court unanimously reversed, finding that claims did not recite patent-eligible subject matter and were invalid under § 101. Opinion at 566 U.S. 66 (2012).
Roche Palo Alto, et al v. Lupin, Ltd., et al (D.N.J.): Trial counsel for plaintiffs in Hatch-Waxman action over defendants’ ANDA for angina drug RANEXA®. After three-week bench trial in May 2013, case settled with Lupin agreeing to forestall entry until three months before patent expiry.
Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., et al (E.D. Tex.): Trial and appellate counsel for plaintiff in Hatch-Waxman actions over defendants’ ANDAs for glaucoma drug COMBIGAN®. District Court found patents infringed and not invalid, and entered injunction against generic entry in August 2011. Injunction affirmed by Federal Circuit on appeal.
In re Brimonidine Patent Litigation, MDL No. 1866 (D. Del.): Trial and appellate counsel for Allergan in multi-district litigation regarding defendants’ ANDAs for glaucoma drugs ALPHAGAN® P .15% and ALPHAGAN® P .1%. Injunction entered against generic entry in October 2009 and affirmed by Federal Circuit on appeal.
Patents on Tap | Do IPR Proceedings Violate the Constitution?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 101
 § 101
 v. 
 v.