- Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Entertainment and Media Litigation
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Fiduciary Disputes
Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
Ediscovery, Applied Science and Economics, and Litigation Support Solutions
-
December 5, 2024Jake Holdreith Named to Twin Cities Business Top 100
-
December 4, 2024Robins Kaplan Obtains $10.5 Million Post-Verdict in Landmark Aerosol Dust Remover Abuse Case
-
December 2, 2024Robins Kaplan LLP Announces 2025 Partners
-
December 12, 2024Strategies for Licensing AI: A Litigation Perspective
-
December 11, 20242024 Year in Review: eDiscovery and Artificial Intelligence
-
December 4, 2024Trust & Estate Litigation in Minnesota
-
December 2024A Landmark Victory for Disabled Homeless Veterans: Q&A with the Trial Team
-
November 8, 2024Trademark tensions on the track: Court upholds First Amendment protections in Haas v. Steiner
-
November 8, 2024Destination Skiing And The DOJ's Mountain Merger Challenge
-
September 16, 2022Uber Company Systems Compromised by Widespread Cyber Hack
-
September 15, 2022US Averts Rail Workers Strike With Last-Minute Tentative Deal
-
September 14, 2022Hotter-Than-Expected August Inflation Prompts Massive Wall Street Selloff
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Find resources to help navigate legal and business complexities.
Brenda L. Joly
Brenda L. Joly
Counsel
Experience
Brenda Joly, a member of the firm's Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation Group and Appellate Advocacy and Guidance Group, has significant experience in intellectual property litigation, with a particular emphasis on patent litigation and appeals. She has handled several patent infringement lawsuits on behalf of both patent owners and patent defendants in federal courts nationwide. Ms. Joly has worked on patent cases involving a broad range of technologies, including in the fields of pharmaceuticals, semiconductor manufacturing, lasers, medical devices, software and computer technology. She also has experience in trademark and copyright cases. Ms. Joly has drafted dozens of appeal briefs, successfully crafting arguments for both appellants and appellees.
Ms. Joly also has experience in a variety of general commercial litigation areas including contract disputes, employment, securities, and antitrust. In addition, she has handled a variety of pro bono matters involving family and domestic violence, as well as criminal law, immigration, housing and benefits issues.
Ms. Joly was a law clerk for the Bureau of Consumer Protection, Division of Marketing Practices, for the Federal Trade Commission in Washington, D.C.
Willis Electric Co., Ltd., v. Polygroup Limited et al, 15-cv-3443, U.S.D.C., D. Minnesota
Litigation counsel on behalf of Willis Electric in achieving a $42.4 million jury verdict in a patent litigation involving artificial Christmas trees. Our client was the inventor of an innovative technology that simplified assembly of prelit artificial Christmas trees. After an eight-day jury trial against Willis Electric’s largest competitor, we achieved a unanimous verdict in favor of Willis Electric finding the patent willfully infringed and not invalid. The damages award is believed to be the largest award for patent infringement in Minnesota history.
Grantley v. Clear Channel Communications, Inc.
Trial counsel in Grantley v. Clear Channel Communications, Inc., a patent infringement case in which a federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas awarded Grantley Corporation $66 million. The jury found that Clear Channel Communications, Inc. infringed on four of Grantley Corporation's patents related to an integrated inventory management system for radio advertising time. The jury also found that the infringement was willful. The verdict was announced on April 22, 2008. On June 11, 2008, the court enhanced the damages by more than $16.5 million, awarded prejudgment interest and entered judgment totaling more than $89 million. The case settled while on appeal under confidential terms.
Wyeth v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 03-CV-1293 (D. N.J.) (with previous firm)
Integral member of litigation team that represented Teva in defending against Wyeth's assertions of patent infringement in response to Teva's bid to market generic venlafaxine hydrochloride extended release capsules, a popular antidepressant sold by Wyeth as Effexor XR. After a Markman ruling and while the Court's ruling on a summary judgment motion was pending, on the eve of trial, a settlement was reached in 2006. Teva subsequently released generic venlafaxine hydrochloride (immediate release) tablets in 2006 and generic extended release capsules in 2010, before the expiration of patents allegedly applicable to the products.
- Recipient of "Patent Impact Case of the Year" award, LMG Life Sciences (2022)
- Named a “North Star Lawyer” by the Minnesota State Bar Association for providing at least 50 hours of pro bono legal services (2016, 2022-2023)
- Massachusetts
- Minnesota
- U.S. District Court, Massachusetts
- U.S. District Court, Minnesota
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
- "Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout Outs," Law.com (January 26, 2024)
RESOURCES
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.