Michael W. Johnson

Michael is a member of the New York Intellectual Property Law Association where he currently serves on the Legislative Action Committee and the Programs Committee.  Michael is also a member of the American Intellectual Property Association.

• Genentech v. Pfizer (bevacizumab) – Represented Pfizer in BPCIA litigation concerning their biosimilar to Avastin, which resulted in a settlement.
• Pfizer v. Genentech – Represented Pfizer in an IPR Proceeding challenging Genentech’'s patent on recombinant antibody technology.
• Genentech v. Pfizer (trastuzumab) – Represented Pfizer in BPCIA litigation concerning their biosimilar to Herceptin, which resulted in a settlement.
• Amgen v. Hospira (erythropoietin) – Represented Hospira in one of the first litigations under the BPCIA regarding Epogen. Obtained appellate victory for Hospira in a case of first impression before the Federal Circuit involving the statutory framework for biologic drug products.
• Hospira v. Genentech (bevacizumab) – Represented Hospira in successful IPR proceeding relating to a method of treatment using bevacizumab as well as the subsequent appeal, which resulted in an affirmance of the PTAB’s decision that all of the challenged claims were unpatentable.
• Hospira v. Genentech – Represented Hospira in successful IPR proceeding related to a patent on Protein A affinity chromatography, which resulted in a decision that all of the challenged claims were unpatentable.
• Takeda v. Array Biopharma – Represented Array in an IPR proceeding on Takeda's compound patent as well as a subsequent appeal, which ultimately resulted in a favorable decision.
• Merck v. Hospira (ertapenem) – Second-chair trial counsel representing Hospira in this patent litigation concerning patents related to Invanz. Court found Merck's patent on the process for making ertapenem invalid as obvious.
• Purdue v. Amneal (oxycontin) – Represented Amneal in the successful appeal of Hatch-Waxman action relating to obviousness of anti-abuse features of reformulated oxycontin.
• Sanofi v. Actavis (cabazitaxel) – Represented Actavis in this patent litigation concerning Jevtana.
• AbbVie v. Hospira (paricalcitol) – Second-chair trial counsel representing Hospira in this patent litigation concerning patents related to Zemplar. Court ruled that Hospira’s generic paricalcitol product does not infringe AbbVie’s U.S. patent.
• Nautilus v. Wockhardt & Edict (diclofenac) – Represented a branded pharmaceutical company against two generic challengers on four patents related to novel formulations and methods of treatment for diclofenac.
• Arkema v. Honeywell – Currently representing a chemical company in a declaratory judgment action seeking to invalidate patents directed to 1234yf, a hydrofluorocarbon used in automobile refrigeration.
• Bloomberg v. Swatch – Represented Bloomberg L.P. in its fair use defense to claims brought by Swatch Ltd for copyright infringement.
• Takeda v. Teva (lansoprazole) – Successfully represented Teva in the Federal Circuit on an appeal from a district court decision of non-infringement. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's decision one day after oral argument.
• Abbott Labs. v. Teva (cefdinir) – Successfully defended Teva from a preliminary injunction motion. Successfully represented Teva in the appeal from the denial of the preliminary injunction motion.
• Pfizer v. Synthon BV (amlodipine) – Successfully represented Synthon in a Federal Circuit appeal resulting in the patent being held invalid as obvious.
• OSI Pharma., Pfizer & Genentech v. Teva (erlotinib) – Represented Teva in a patent litigation concerning three patents.