Jeffrey P. Kushan

JEFFREY KUSHAN serves as a global coordinator of the firm’s national IP Litigation practice, and focuses his practice on patent litigation, patent appeals, and contested proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Jeff leverages his deep scientific and patent law experience to develop winning strategies in complex, high-stakes patent litigation. He has represented companies in district court litigation involving groundbreaking cancer biologics, biosimilar and generic drug products under the BPCIA and Hatch-Waxman Act, and a diverse array of consumer electronics, software, industrial biotechnology and other technologies. Jeff also has an extensive practice representing companies before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board — he has been lead counsel in more than 225 PTAB proceedings and argued more than 25 times before the Board. Jeff also represents clients in patent appeals before the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court, and has authored more than a dozen amicus briefs for companies and trade associations before those courts.

In addition to his work on patent litigation, Jeff advises clients, including trade associations, on domestic and international patent policy matters, including patent law reform, the BPCIA and Hatch-Waxman systems, and legislation concerning follow-on biological products. Prior to entering private practice, Jeff served in the Patent and Trademark Office where he led efforts to develop biotechnology and software examination standards, worked on implementation of the TRIPS Agreement and other legislation, and supported negotiations on patent law, environmental and trade agreements. Jeff also served in the Office of the United States Trade Representative in Geneva, Switzerland, where he was the chief U.S. negotiator for the 1996 WIPO “Internet” treaties and represented the U.S. in WTO disputes involving the TRIPS Agreement. Jeff has testified numerous times before Congress on patent law, trade and other topics, and is a frequent lecturer on domestic and international patent issues.

Recognitions

• Chambers Global has recognized Jeff for Intellectual Property: Patent (USA) (2016–2025).
• Jeff was named a “Life Sciences Star” by LMG Life Sciences for his work in General Patent Litigation (most recently in 2024).
• Sidley received the “Chambers Award for Excellence” from Chambers USA in the Intellectual Property category. Sidley’s Intellectual Property group was named “Team of the Year” in 2014 and 2011.
• Chambers USA has consistently recognized Jeff for his practice since 2009, most recently in Intellectual Property (Nationwide) (2021–2024) and Intellectual Property: Litigation in the District of Columbia (2012–2024). Clients praise him as “terrific and extremely knowledgeable in the patent office on IPR procedures” (2018), “a go-to adviser because of his exceptional case development skills and strategy,” (2020), and “an expert Hatch-Waxman litigator with extensive experience in district court and appellate proceedings” (2019).
• Jeff was named a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation in 2021.
• Jeff was named an “Intellectual Property Trailblazer” by the National Law Journal in 2017.
• Jeff was shortlisted by Managing IP as one of the leading PTAB practitioners of 2015.
• International Who’s Who Legal has recognized Jeff as a leading practitioner in intellectual property or life sciences since 2008.
• PLC has recognized Jeff since 2003 as a leading lawyer in life sciences, intellectual property or IP business transactions. 
• IAM has recognized Jeff as one of the world’s leading patent professionals in its IAM 1000 publication annually since 2013.
• Jeff has been recognized by Best Lawyers of America annually since 2008 for life sciences or intellectual property.
• Jeff was named one of top 45 lawyers in the country under the age of 45 by American Lawyer magazine in 2003.

Representative Litigation, PTAB/PTO and Appellate Matters

MERCK & CO

• Bristol-Myers Squibb et al. v. Merck & Co., Inc. (D. Del. 2015), represented Merck in patent infringement action accusing Merck’s Keytruda® PD-1 antibody cancer drug (settled 2017).
• Merck v. Ono Pharmaceuticals (2016), lead counsel in inter partes review (IPR) proceeding before PTAB challenging patents on PD-1 antibodies (settled 2017).

AMGEN

• Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. & Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2013), secured dismissal of a declaratory judgment action brought by Sandoz concerning patents on etanercept in 2013; decision affirmed by Federal Circuit in 2015.
• Immunex Corp., Amgen Manufacturing Ltd, and Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Sandoz International GMBH, and Sandoz GMBH (D.N.J. 2015), defeated validity challenges to patents on etanercept by Sandoz in litigation concerning Sandoz's biosimilar etanercept product; decision affirmed by Federal Circuit in 2019; cert denied by Supreme Court in 2020.
• Coherus Biosciences v. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. and Immunex Corp. (2017), as lead counsel, prevented institution of inter partes review proceeding on patents on etanercept. 
• Coalition for Affordable Drugs et al., v. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., Immunex Corp., and Amgen Inc. (2015), as lead counsel, prevented institution of inter partes review proceeding on patents on etanercept.

GENENTECH, INC.

• Genentech, Inc. v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, (N.D. Cal., 2010), defended Genentech in litigation involving patents on antibodies to her2 antigen (settled 2012).
• Boehringer Ingelheim et al. v. Genentech and Biogen, represented patent owners in successful defense of patents in inter partes reviews involving anti-CD20 antibodies (settled or not instituted).
• Cabilly v. Boss, confirmed validity of patents on antibody production methods in interference, reexamination, and appeal proceedings.
• Adair v. Carter, won interference proceeding on patents on humanization techniques for monoclonal antibodies; secured affirmance by Federal Circuit (2012).
• Chiron Corp. v. Genentech, Inc., supported district court litigation finding patents on antibody to her2 antigen invalid, decision affirmed by Federal Circuit (2004).

TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS

• Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. v. UCB Biopharma SPRL et al., (E.D. Va. 2017), declaratory judgment action relating to antibody humanization patent (settled shortly after initiation of suit in 2018).

GENUS PLC

• ABS Global v Cytonome/XY LLC, successfully challenged family of patents on techniques for sorting sperm cells used in cattle breeding in a series of IPR proceedings. 

MICROSOFT CORPORATION

• Microsoft Corp. v. B.E. Technologies, lead counsel in IPR proceedings holding networking patents unpatentable; decisions affirmed by Federal Circuit (2016).
• Microsoft Corp. v. SurfCast Inc., lead counsel in IPR proceedings holding operating system interface patents unpatentable; decisions affirmed by Federal Circuit (2016).

BAXTER HEALTHCARE

• Baxter Healthcare Corp. v. Millenium Biologix, LLC. (2014), lead counsel in IPR proceedings that invalidated patents on bone growth materials.

OWENS CORNING

• Owens Corning v. CertainTeed Corp. (2015), lead counsel in IPR proceedings that invalidated family of patents on roofing shingles.

GLAXOSMITHKLINE

• Smithkline Beecham PLC, et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, and Smithkline Beecham PLC, et al. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Ltd., et al.,  (D.N.J. 2003), represented patent owner in litigation involving Avandia® (settled)

JOHNSON & JOHNSON

• Alza Corporation and McNeil-PPC v. Impax Laboratories, Andrx Pharmaceuticals, et al., (D. Del. 2005), represented patent owner in litigation involving Concerta®.
• Ortho McNeil Pharmaceutical v. Kali Laboratories, (D.N.J. 2002), Ortho McNeil Pharmaceutical v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, et al., (D.N.J. 2004), Ortho McNeil Pharmaceutical v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, (E.D. Mich. 2005), Ortho McNeil Pharmaceutical v. Apotex, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2007), represented patent owner in litigation involving Ultracet®.

THE MEDICINES COMPANY

• The Medicines Company v. David Kappos et al., (E.D. Va. 2012), successfully represented Medicines Company in litigation against PTO concerning entitlement to patent term extension under 35 U.S.C. § 156.

PFIZER/WYETH

• Alzheimer’s Institute of America v. Pfizer Inc. (E.D. Miss. 2009), represented Pfizer in litigation involving patent on “Swedish” mutation of the amyloid beta protein (settled 2011).

• Fellow of the American Bar Foundation
• American Bar Association, Intellectual Property Section 
• American Intellectual Property Law Association 
• Adjunct Professor, George Washington University Law School
• Cleared Advisor, U.S. Government Industry Functional Advisory Committee (ITAC - 13) (Intellectual Property)