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.
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.
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.