Brian M. Kramer

Brian M. Kramer

Education

Valparaiso University (B.S., 1997)
University of Illinois College of Law (J.D., 2000)

Bar Admissions

California
U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

Clerkships

Hon. Sue L. Robinson, U.S. District Court, District of Delaware (2000-2001)
Hon. Richard Linn, U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit (2001-2003)

Brian M. Kramer is a partner in the firm’s Intellectual Property Group, where his practice focuses primarily on patent litigation.

Mr. Kramer’s work defending companies accused of patent infringement spans diverse technology areas including video compression, wireless technology, medical devices, diagnostic tools, DNA sequencing techniques, ultracapacitors and pharmaceuticals. His trial experience includes a jury verdict of noninfringement while defending a client being sued by a rival alleging $100 million in damages. More recently, Mr. Kramer argued and won an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on behalf of an accused patent infringer.

Mr. Kramer is a registered patent attorney admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). He is a member of the American Intellectual Property Law Association, the Federal Circuit Bar Association and the American Bar Association. He serves on the board of directors of the Japan Society of San Diego and Tijuana and the Legal Aid Society of San Diego.

Mr. Kramer received a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from Valparaiso University in 1997 and his J.D., magna cum laude, from the University of Illinois College Of Law in 2000. 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. Before joining the firm in 2003, Mr. Kramer served as a law clerk to both Judge Richard Linn of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., and Chief Judge Sue L. Robinson of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.

DNA Genotek v. Ancestry.com DNA
(District of Delaware). Represented DNA Genotek in litigation asserting patent involving DNA sample collection devices.  Obtained eight-figure settlement and ongoing royalty following favorable IPR and claim construction proceedings.
Allergan Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories and Sandoz Inc.
(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 new regulatory strategy that resulted in noninfringement verdict after convincing court to order a new trial.
Round Rock Research v. Dole Food Co.
(District of Delaware). Represented Dole in patent infringement case involving RFID technology. Successfully argued motion to stay case pending reexamination before the PTO and then settled case on favorable terms.
Abbott Laboratories v. DexCom
(District of Delaware). Represented DexCom in patent infringement case involving continuous blood glucose monitoring systems.  Defeated preliminary injunction efforts, allowing client to become first to launch product.
NessCap Co. Ltd. v. Maxwell Technologies, Inc.
(District of Delaware). Represented Maxwell in 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.
Allergan Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.
(District of Delaware). Represented accused infringer and was part of team that obtained a verdict of patent invalidity for obviousness. Argued and won appeal before U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
DNA Genotek v. Ancestry.com DNA
(District of Delaware). Represented DNA Genotek in litigation asserting patent involving DNA sample collection devices.  Obtained eight-figure settlement and ongoing royalty following favorable IPR and claim construction proceedings.
Allergan Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories and Sandoz Inc.
(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 new regulatory strategy that resulted in noninfringement verdict after convincing court to order a new trial.
Round Rock Research v. Dole Food Co.
(District of Delaware). Represented Dole in patent infringement case involving RFID technology. Successfully argued motion to stay case pending reexamination before the PTO and then settled case on favorable terms.
Abbott Laboratories v. DexCom
(District of Delaware). Represented DexCom in patent infringement case involving continuous blood glucose monitoring systems.  Defeated preliminary injunction efforts, allowing client to become first to launch product.
NessCap Co. Ltd. v. Maxwell Technologies, Inc.
(District of Delaware). Represented Maxwell in 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.
Allergan Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.
(District of Delaware). Represented accused infringer and was part of team that obtained a verdict of patent invalidity for obviousness. Argued and won appeal before U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Email Disclaimer

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.

©1996-2017 Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved.