Andrea WeissJeffries

Partner

Los Angeles + 1.213.243.2176

Contact

Partager

Andrea Jeffries is an IP-focused trial lawyer with nearly 30 years of experience. Andrea leads significant intellectual property matters involving patents, trade secrets, and other forms of IP across a range of technologies, including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, semiconductors, and wireless communications. In the life sciences arena, Andrea has represented major pharmaceutical companies in high-stakes Hatch-Waxman, trade secret, and biotech matters. In the technology sector, she has handled complex matters for prominent companies as well as for universities.

Andrea has represented clients in IP cases in federal courts throughout the country. Most recently, she led a Jones Day team in obtaining, along with co-counsel, a $752 million verdict on behalf of patentee Sloan Kettering Institute and Juno Therapeutics (a subsidiary of Celgene Corporation, now a Bristol Myers Squibb company) in a patent infringement trial in the Central District of California involving CAR-T therapy.

Andrea has written and spoken extensively on IP topics, including particularly on trade secret litigation and patent damages. She has been active in the Sedona Conference, serving as chair and chair emeritus of the Patent Damages & Remedies Working Group and vice chair and vice chair emeritus of the Patent Litigation Best Practices Working Group, both since 2015. In addition, Andrea has served on the Executive Committee of the University of Southern California Intellectual Property Institute (USC IPI) since 2016.

Andrea is recognized among the top IP and technology lawyers in California.

Expérience

  • Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center defeats IPR petition brought by Miltenyi Biomedicine GmbHJones Day represented patent owner Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, on behalf of exclusive licensee Bristol Myers Squibb, in successfully defeating a patent challenge in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding brought by petitioners Miltenyi Biomedicine GmbH and Miltenyi Biotec Inc. ("Miltenyi") in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
  • Merck wins bench trial over patent term extension issue in Hatch-Waxman multi-party dispute involving BRIDION®Jones Day is representing Merck Sharp & Dohme, B.V. in Hatch-Waxman patent infringement actions originally against 16 generic drug maker defendant groups, relating to the defendant groups' submissions of Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDA) to the FDA seeking approval of generic versions of BRIDION®, a first-in-class agent for the reversal of certain types of neuromuscular blockade induced in adults undergoing surgery.
  • Procter & Gamble settles patent infringement claims related to teeth whitening stripsJones Day represented The Procter & Gamble Company in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by CAO Group for alleged infringement of patents relating to teeth whitening strips.
  • Cohesity disposes of six-patent litigation brought by adverse competitor CommvaultJones Day successfully represented Cohesity Inc. ("Cohesity") and obtained dismissal in a six-patent, competitor suit filed by Commvault Systems in April 21, 2020.
  • Merck unit resolves DJ action involving pneumococcal vaccine patentsJones Day represented Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. in an action in Delaware district court against Pfizer (through its subsidiaries including Wyeth, LLC) involving several patents on Wyeth’s vaccine technology.
  • Sloan Kettering and Juno Therapeutics win over $1.1 billion after jury verdict and post-trial motions in patent dispute with Kite Pharma/Gilead involving CAR-T therapyOn behalf of patentee Sloan Kettering Institute and exclusive licensee Juno Therapeutics (a subsidiary of Celgene Corporation, a Bristol Myers Squibb company), Jones Day and co-counsel prevailed in a jury trial that spanned eight days and involved 22 witnesses, wherein the jury awarded our clients $752 million in compensation for the infringement of their patents by Kite Pharma, Inc. (a Gilead Sciences, Inc. company) through the making and selling of its infringing CAR-T therapy, YESCARTA®.
  • Adocia prevails in biopharma license agreement dispute in international arbitrationJones Day won a binding arbitration award for French biopharmaceutical company, Adocia S.A., in a license agreement dispute against Eli Lilly and Company.
  • Celgene acquires Juno Therapeutics for $9 billionOn behalf of Celgene Corporation, Jones Day conducted a large-scale intellectual property due diligence review and evaluation of matters related to its definitive merger agreement and acquisition of Juno Therapeutics for approximately $9 billion, including Juno’s technology related to CAR-T and TCR cellular immunotherapeutics for use in oncology and other indications.
  • GTAT protects trade secrets, obtains restraining order against former employeeJones Day assisted GT Advanced Technologies (GTAT), a leader in providing technology solutions to the solar industry, in pursuing claims of trade secret misappropriation and breach of contracts against a former employee when he departed the company after over a decade of exposure to its trade secrets and confidential information.
  • H&R Block defeats patent infringement case brought by UnilocJones Day successfully defended H&R Block, Inc. in a multi-patent infringement lawsuit brought by Uniloc USA, Inc.

    • The following represents experience acquired prior to joining Jones Day.

    Represented an industrial crystal growth company in a trade secret dispute involving specialized equipment and processes for the purification of materials for the solar industry. Engaged is early mediation and obtained favorable settlement.

    Represented an American toy and board game company against allegations of copyright infringement of board game characters. Obtained favorable settlement.

    Represented a global consumer electronics company accused of infringing a patent involving the processing of compute instructions in the Western District of Wisconsin. Obtained favorable judgment.

    Represented a global sportswear and athletic goods company in a trademark and trade dress matter in the District of Massachusetts. Obtained desirable stay of proceedings.

    Represented a global networking company in patent litigation involving internet traffic transmissions in the Northern District of California. Obtained early dismissal of matter.

    Represented a major semiconductor company in a jury trial in the Central District of California involving the infringement of several patents related to high-speed networking devices used in data centers. Obtained a favorable outcome after a two-year-long patent infringement case. The Federal Circuit affirmed the permanent injunction and the underlying findings of infringement and validity.

    Represented a major networking equipment manufacturer accused of infringing four patents related to point-to-point network communications in the Northern District of California. Obtained early dismissal of matter.

    Represented a global sportswear and athletic goods company in a patent infringement case in the Central District of California involving athlete-sponsored contests for designing shoes using a network-based graphical software tool. Obtained favorable settlement on behalf of client.

    Represented global processor company accused of infringing a family of Wi-Fi patents in the Central District of California. Obtained a favorable claim construction ruling and summary judgment of noninfringement that was upheld on appeal.

    Represented a branded pharmaceutical company in ANDA litigation involving Niacin formulations in the District of Delaware. Obtained favorable settlements.

    Represented a software manufacturer accused of infringing a patent in the Central District of California in obtaining a favorable claim construction ruling and summary judgment ruling.

    Represented Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tag manufacturer against accusations of infringing 14 patents relating to various aspects of RFID tags in the District of North Dakota in obtaining favorable claim construction and summary judgment rulings or dismissal of 13 of the 14 patents, with the final patent submitted to reexamination proceedings.

    Represented pharmaceutical company accused of infringing two patents relating to cyclosporine formulations in the District of Delaware through trial and on appeal, ultimately prevailing in the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the district court's grant of judgment as a matter of law.

    October 2024 Reprint

    Primer On Chinese Trade Secret Disputes For U.S. Practitioners (Law360)

    July 2024 Commentary

    Federal Circuit Revives Induced Infringement Claims Despite "Skinny Label" Carve-Out

    JANUARY 2024 Alert

    Federal Circuit Denies Petition for Rehearing En Banc Filed By Cellect, LLC

    February 2023 Video

    JONES DAY PRESENTS®: When the Effort to Protect Pays Out: Identifying, Protecting and Litigating the Crown Jewels

    March/April 2022 External Publications

    Navigating Trade Secret Identification During Discovery: Timing and Scope, IP Litigator

    January 2022 Commentary

    Inducement Suit Proceeds Against Insurance Company for Encouraging Use of Generic Drug

    December 2021 White Paper

    Navigating Trade Secret Identification During Discovery: Timing & Scope

    February 2021 White Paper

    Protecting AI Innovations Through Trade Secrets and Patent Protection

    August 2020 Video

    JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Helping Clients with Trade Secret Protection

    August 2020 Video

    JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Effective Collaboration in Trade Secret Litigation
    Voir toutes les publications

    Autres publications

    • October 4, 2024
      Primer on Chinese Trade Secret Disputes For US Practitioners, IPLaw360
    • November 2018
      "A Key Distinction: Knowledge, Skills, and Training vs. Trade Secrets," in PLI Intellectual Property Course Handbook Series, Trade Secrets 2018: What Every Lawyer Should Know

    • October 12, 2023
      ACI Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Proficiency Series, "The Orange Book: Listings, De-Listings, and Other Matters of Interest."
    • September 23, 2020
      USC IP Institute 2020, Moderator of Panel Discussion entitled, "The Rise of Trade Secret Litigation."
    • March 3, 2020
      Association of Corporate Counsel Panel Discussion entitled, "Protecting Your Patents: Preparing for IPRs and Hatch-Waxman Litigation."
    • January 30, 2020
      Jones Day MCLE University Panel Discussion Entitled, "What You Need To Know About Trade Secrets and The Recent Rise in Trade Secret Litigation."
    • November 15, 2019
      California Lawyers Association, IP Law Section, 44th Annual IP Institute, IP Without Borders, Panel Discussion entitled, "Doubling Down on Artificial Intelligence and Big Data Patents a Safe Bet or a Gamble?"
    • October 29, 2019
      Jones Day Women in IP Speaker Series, "What You Need To Know About Trade Secrets and the Recent Rise in Trade Secret Litigation."
    • October 7, 2019
      PLI's Trade Secrets 2019: What Every Lawyer Should Know.
    • November 7, 2018
      PLI's Trade Secrets 2018: What Every Lawyer Should Know
    • September 15, 2018
      Los Angeles Mayor Women In STEM (WiSTEM) Initiative Launch Moderator of Panel of LA Women CEOs, entitled "Women On The Cutting Edge."
    • April 25, 2018
      Biocom LA: Intellectual Property Pitfalls, Protecting Your Company After First Invention Disclosures & Patent Applications
    • March 20, 2018
      USC Intellectual Property Institute, Panel Moderator, "Considerations of Patent and Technology Readiness in Light of Recent Developments in the Law"
    • February 20, 2018
      Leahy Institute of Advanced Patent Studies, 3rd Annual Naples Roundtable Conference

    Avant d’envoyer cet e-mail, veuillez prendre note de ce qui suit :

    Les informations contenues sur le site www.jonesday.com sont destinées à un usage général et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques. L’envoi et la réception de cet e-mail n’ont pas pour effet de créer une relation avocat-client. Aucun envoi de votre part à un membre du Cabinet ne sera traité comme confidentiel ou protégé à moins que nous n’ayons donné notre accord pour vous représenter. En envoyant cet e-mail, vous confirmez avoir lu et compris la présente notification.