Brian M. Kramer

Partner | San Diego | (858) 314-5415
(858) 314-5415
My clients typically win well before trial, but I love winning in the courtroom, too.

Brian is a trial lawyer focusing primarily on patent litigation, often defending companies accused of patent infringement. His work spans diverse technology areas, such as pharmaceuticals, medical devices, diagnostic tools, and DNA sequencing techniques. He has also represented makers of ultracapacitors, video compression techniques, and wireless technology.

Brian has successfully tried cases in U.S. district courts and successfully argued appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. His trial experience includes obtaining a jury verdict of non–infringement for a client sued by a rival for over $100 million, and a bench trial involving a drug with annual sales over $4 billion.

Brian is a member of the American Intellectual Property Law Association, Federal Circuit Bar Association, and American Bar Association. He is chair of the board of directors of the Japan Society of San Diego and Tijuana, and past president of the board of directors of the Legal Aid Society of San Diego.

In law school, he served as an associate editor of the University of Illinois Law Review and as the first managing editor of the University of Illinois Journal of Law, Technology & Policy.

Show More


  • (District of Delaware) Represented Chugai in patent litigation involving Chugai’s revolutionary antibody recycling technology. The team secured a $775 million for Chugai hours before jury selection and opening statements at trial.

  • (District of Delaware) Representing Chugai Pharmaceuticals in litigation involving Chugai’s prescription hemophilia medicine, Hemlibra®. Helped devise strategy to defeat a preliminary injunction motion and to get Chugai dismissed from the case, which is currently on appeal.

  • (District of Delaware) Represented DNA Genotek in litigation asserting patent involving DNA sample collection devices. Obtained an eight–figure settlement and ongoing royalty following favorable IPR and claim construction proceedings.

  • (Eastern District of Texas) Represented Alcon and Sandoz at trial in Hatch–Waxman litigation involving glaucoma medication. Assumed case from prior counsel who lost first trial. Devised a new regulatory strategy that resulted in noninfringement verdict after convincing court to order a new trial.

  • (District of Delaware) Represented Dole in a patent infringement case involving RFID technology. Successfully argued motion to stay case pending reexamination before the PTO and then settled case on favorable terms.

  • (District of Delaware) Represented DexCom in a patent infringement case involving continuous blood glucose monitoring systems. Defeated preliminary injunction efforts, allowing client to become first to launch product.

  • (District of Delaware) Represented Maxwell in a case in which both parties asserted patents against each other. Obtained rare transfer out of the District of Delaware when both plaintiff and defendant were Delaware corporations. Maxwell ultimately obtained a preliminary injunction for infringement of its patents. Led appeal team to preserve the injunction, settling on favorable terms on the eve of the Federal Circuit argument.

  • (District of Delaware) Represented accused infringer and was part of the team that obtained a verdict of patent invalidity for obviousness. Argued and won appeal before U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.



Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.