David C. Doyle

Partner

San Diego, (858) 720-5139

Download vCard

Education

University of California, San Diego (B.A., 1973)
;
University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law (J.D., 1976)

Practices

Patent Litigation

Patent Reexaminations

Intellectual Property Litigation

Bar Admissions

California

Mr. Doyle’s practice focuses on patent litigation disputes for pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device, electronics, and other technology companies. He has a wealth of jury trial experience in patent cases, including numerous multi-week jury trials in the past five years. Boasting a truly nationwide practice, Mr. Doyle is currently serving as lead trial counsel in patent cases pending in New York, New Jersey, Texas, Delaware, Colorado, Nevada, and California. His last patent trial was an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) case in the New Jersey District Court from February 27 to March 9, 2012. He also has a long and distinguished track record of serving as lead appellate counsel in cases before the Federal Circuit. His most recent Federal Circuit appeal resulted in an affirmance of a 2011 trial victory on June 17, 2012.

Mr. Doyle was named Best Lawyer’s "San Diego Litigation – Patent Lawyer of the Year" for 2013, an honor given to a single lawyer in the metropolitan area. He was also named as a 2011 BTI Client Service All-Star by corporate counsel in recognition of his excellence in client service and was honored in The National Law Journal's 2010 Winning list of the nation's most accomplished trial lawyers. He is perennially selected as a top IP lawyer in the United States by Chambers USA, was selected for the eighth year in a row as a top IP attorney by his peers in Best Lawyers in America 2013, and in 2006, 2007, 2010, 2012, and 2013 was ranked as one of the top 10 IP lawyers in the United States by U.S. Lawyer Rankings. In 2013, the Daily Journal named Mr. Doyle one of the Top 75 IP Litigators in California, and every year since 2005 both the San Diego Daily Transcript and the Los Angeles Times have recognized Mr. Doyle as one of Southern California’s leading IP attorneys.

Mr. Doyle is also active in community legal interests. Currently, he is chairman of the board of directors for the Kyoto Prize Symposium, a legal, corporate, and scientific organization that recognizes international scientific achievement. Upon invitation by the U.S. District Court, he also has chaired three Magistrate Selection attorney committees for the Southern District Court of California. He is presently serving on the Southern District of California’s Committee to revise the Patent Case Local Rules.

Generic Drug/ANDA Litigation

(District of Delaware, Southern District of New York, District of Columbia, District of Nevada, Eastern District of Texas, and District of New Jersey). Mr. Doyle is the leader of the firm’s ANDA Patent Litigation Practice Group. He presently serves as lead trial counsel in eight pending ANDA cases in New York, New Jersey, the District of Columbia, and Delaware. These cases involve the following generic drugs: glatiramer acetate, paricalcitol, dexmedetomidine, amlodipine besylate/atorvastatin calcium, docetaxel, epinastine, trospium chloride, niacin, and tygecycline. He completed three ANDA trials in 2011, and one so far in 2012.

Applied Biosystems Group v. Illumina

(Northern District of California). Mr. Doyle represented the world’s largest maker of DNA sequencing systems, Applied Biosystems (AB), against one of its biggest competitors, Illumina, seeking a declaratory judgment that AB’s newest DNA sequencing system did not infringe patents held by Illumina and that the patents were invalid. The patents involved biotechnology, electronics, and software elements. AB prevailed on a key summary judgment ruling of noninfringement on one of the four asserted claims. During trial, Mr. Doyle eliminated one other claim as invalid, and another as not infringed. After a three-week trial, the jury agreed that AB’s probes did not infringe the remaining claim. All rulings were affirmed on appeal.

St. Clair v. Kyocera Wireless Corp. and Kyocera Communications, Inc.

(District of Delaware). Mr. Doyle represents Palm, Inc., Kyocera Wireless Corporation and Kyocera Communications, Inc. as lead trial counsel in this patent infringement case. He succeeded in winning a summary judgment of noninfringement as to all asserted claims.

Eastman Kodak v. Kyocera Corp.

(Southern District of New York). Mr. Doyle represents Kyocera Corporation as lead trial counsel in this patent/licensing dispute involving the Kodak digital imaging patent portfolio.

Merck KGAA v. Integra - Life Sciences Amicus Representation

(U.S. Supreme Court). Mr. Doyle represented a group of biotechnology tool companies and trade associations in submitting an important amicus brief in a case involving 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(i)(use of patent for FDA information). The Supreme Court’s decision expressly avoided a result that would have undermined the patent rights of biotechnology tool companies.

Nichols Institute Diagnostics v. Scantibodies Clinical Laboratory

(Southern District of California). Mr. Doyle represented Scantibodies in this patent suit brought by Nichols involving immunoassays to detect levels of parathyroid hormone (PTH) in human blood. Mr. Doyle prevailed in a three-week jury trial which resulted in a jury verdict invalidating the patent on best mode, enablement, and written description grounds. The Federal Circuit affirmed the jury verdict ruling that the ‘790 patent was anticipated by the inventors’ own prior publication.

General Atomics (Diazyme Division) v. Axis-Shield ASA

(Northern District of California). Mr. Doyle represented General Atomics in a patent case against Axis-Shield ASA involving General Atomics’ Diazyme Laboratories Division’s enzymatic homocysteine assay. On Morrison & Foerster's advice, General Atomics filed a successful early motion for summary judgment of noninfringement, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on appeal.

Abbott Laboratories v. Syntron Bioresearch

(Southern District of California). Mr. Doyle obtained a jury verdict of noninfringement for Syntron Bioresearch in a patent suit brought by Abbott Laboratories alleging that Syntron's test kits infringed two of Abbott's lateral flow immunoassay patents. After a three-week trial, the jury returned a verdict of noninfringement on both patents asserted by Abbott. On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed on all issues, except the construction of a single claim term. Following appeal, the case was settled on the terms Syntron had originally proposed.

Composite Rotor v. Beckman Coulter, Inc.

(Northern District of California). Mr. Doyle represented Beckman Coulter in defense of a patent infringement action filed by Composite Rotor regarding a medical centrifuge patent. He obtained a summary judgment of noninfringement which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.