Source: https://www.merchantgould.com/Professionals/B-Jefferson-Boggs-Jr
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 21:13:14+00:00

Document:
Home >> Professionals >> B. Jefferson Boggs, Jr.
B. Jefferson ("Jeff") is a patent attorney and partner in Merchant & Gould's Washington, DC office. He has extensive experience in patent litigation and patent interference matters before federal district courts nationwide and the former Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (now the Patent Trial and Appeal Board). He also counsels clients on patentability, patent validity, and patent infringement matters, and has successfully prosecuted critical patent applications for his clients. With a technical background in chemical engineering, Jeff enjoys the intellectual challenge at the intersection of law and science.
As a former patent examiner at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Jeff was responsible for patent applications directed to chemical, electrochemical, and chemical engineering technologies. Now he uses that knowledge of the USPTO to work through the patent process efficiently and skillfully for his clients.
Reckitt Benckiser, Inc. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc. - Florida, and Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Southern District of Florida) - represented the Watson defendants in a patent infringement action under the Hatch-Waxman Act brought by Reckitt Benckiser regarding guaifenesin and the Mucinex® line of brand-name products.
In re Brimonidine Patent Litigation (District of Delaware) - represented Exela PharmSci. Inc. in a patent infringement action under the Hatch-Waxman Act brought by Allergan regarding brimonidine tartrate used to lower intra-ocular pressure and help alleviate the symptoms of glaucoma.
Ferring B.V. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc.-Florida (District of Nevada) - represented the Watson (Actavis) defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Ferring regarding tranexamic acid and the Lysteda® brand-name product.
G.D. Searle LLC and Pfizer Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc., et. al. (Eastern District of Virginia) - represented the Watson (Actavis) defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Pfizer regarding celecoxib and the Celebrex® brand-name product.
Warner Chilcott Company and Warner Chilcott (US), LLC v. Watson Laboratories, Inc.-Florida (District of New Jersey) - represented the Watson (Actavis) defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Warner Chilcott relating to risedronate sodium and the Atelvia® brand-name product.
Gilead Sciences, Inc. and Emory University v. Cipla Limited (Southern District of New York) - represented the Cipla defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Gilead regarding emtricitabine and the Emtriva® brand-name product used to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection.
Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Cipla Limited (Southern District of New York) - represented the Cipla defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Gilead regarding tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and the Viread® brand-name product used to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection.
Pfizer, Wyeth and PF Prism v. Breckenridge, Alembic Pharmaceuticals and Alembic Limited (District of Delaware) - represented the Breckenridge and Alembic defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Pfizer relating to desvenlafaxine succinate and the Pristiq® brand-name product.
Enzo Therapeutics, Inc. v. Yeda Research & Dev. Co. (Eastern District of Virginia) - represented Yeda Research and Development Co. in a §146 Action involving interferon- 2.
N2IT Holding BV v. Native Instruments GmbH (Central District of California) - represented the patent owner N2IT in a patent infringement case concerning electronic systems for controlling the playback of digital music.
Ceravision, Limited V. Luxim Corporation (Northern District of California) - represented Ceravision in a §146 Action involving high-intensity light sources.
Eli Lilly and Co. v. Zenith Goldline Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Southern District of Indiana) - represented Lilly in patent infringement action under Hatch Waxman Act, finding defendants to have willfully infringed Lilly's patent to Nizatidine and the product AXID®.
Mueller Sports Medicine v. Beveridge Marketing (Western District of Wisconsin) - represented defendant against charge that its temporary tattoos infringed patent for under-eye patches.
Yu et al (Human Genome Sciences, Inc.) v. Browning et al (Biogen Idec) - Represented Human Genome Sciences in an interference proceeding relating to LymphoStat-B, a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits the biological activity of B-lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS), before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
Novozymes North America, Inc. v. Genencor International, Inc. - Patent Interference No. 105,155 - Represented Genencor in an interference proceeding relating to cellulase enzymes for detergents before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
Novo Nordisk A/S v. Eli Lilly and Co. (District of Delaware) - represented Lilly in a declaratory judgment action by a competitor for non-infringement and invalidity of Lilly's patent on the rapid-acting human insulin analog formulation, insulin lispro [rDNA origin]), and the product Humalog®.
Eli Lilly and Company v. University of Washington - Represented Eli Lilly in an interference proceeding involving Protein C before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
Gordon Howard Assocs. v. Payment Protection Systems, Inc. (District of Colorado) - represented patent owner and maker of automobile loan payment assurance devices, in a declaratory judgment action by a competitor for no patent infringement, unfair competition and other business torts.
Allied Signal v. Cooper Automotive (District of Delaware) - defended Cooper against charge that its platinum-tipped CHAMPION® spark plugs infringed the plaintiff's patent.
BASF Corp. v. Eastman Chemical Co. (District of Delaware) - defended Eastman against charge of patent infringement concerning a catalytic process for making 2,5-dihydrofuran, a chemical intermediate.
Rhodia Chimie and Rhodia, Inc. v. PPG Industries, Inc. (District of Delaware) - represented plaintiff in a patent infringement action concerning silica particulates.
Driver ID, Inc. v. Payment Protection Systems, Inc. (Eastern District of Michigan) - represented defendant in patent infringement case concerning automotive electronics.
Eli Lilly and Company v. Novo Nordisk of North America, Inc., et al. (Southern District of Indiana) - represented Lilly in a patent infringement case involving formulations for recombinant human growth hormone.
Novo Nordisk of North America v. Eli Lilly and Company (District of New Jersey) - Defended Lilly against charge of patent infringement case involving Lilly's recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) and its product Humatrope®.
Boerner GmbH v. Bed Bath & Beyond (Eastern District of Virginia) - Represented the patent owner in patent infringement action involving cutlery tools.
Bolanos v. MacGregor Golf Company (District of Connecticut) - Defended MacGregor Golf Company in a patent infringement action relating to golf club design.
TV Interactive Data Corporation v. Microsoft Corporation (Northern District of California) - Defended Microsoft against charge of patent infringement involving its Windows technology.
Sturman Industries v. Caterpillar - Represented Sturman in an interference proceeding involving fuel injector valves before U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
Open Network Solutions, Inc. v. Brother Industries, Ltd. and Brother International Corporation (District of Delaware) - representing the Brother defendants in a patent infringement action brought by Open Network Solutions, Inc. relating to network systems and interfaces of mobile device printers.
Select Milk Producers, Inc. v. Valio, Ltd. – represented Valio in an interference proceeding involving the process for producing a lactose-free milk product before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Schrage (Donaldson, Inc.), et al v. Brown (Baldwin Filters), et al. - represented party Schrage in an interference proceeding involving filter elements used in engine air flow systems before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Click here to read Law360, April 1, 2013 article. M&G's B. Jefferson Boggs, Christopher Sorenson and Aaron M. Johnson are among those representing the plaintiff.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 §146
 v. 
 V. 
 §146
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.