John R. Lanham

John R. Lanham

Education

Colorado College (B.A., 2005)
Northwestern University School of Law (J.D., 2008)

Bar Admissions

Colorado
California

John Lanham is an associate in the firm’s Intellectual Property Group. Mr. Lanham focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation and commercial litigation. Mr. Lanham brings his broad-based business litigation experience to bear on his clients’ most challenging disputes.

Mr. Lanham has worked in both the San Diego and Denver offices of Morrison & Foerster. He has represented clients in the pharmaceutical, financial, communications, information technology, natural resources, and healthcare industries. Mr. Lanham regularly assists clients with all phases of litigation, including development of case strategy, dispositive motions, claim construction, fact discovery, expert discovery, trial preparation, alternative dispute resolution, and taking and defending the depositions of both fact and expert witnesses. Mr. Lanham frequently works with scientific and economic experts to develop accurate and persuasive case theories for his clients. He also maintains an active pro bono practice focused on children’s rights and constitutional issues.

Mr. Lanham received his J.D. cum laude from Northwestern University School of Law. While at Northwestern, Mr. Lanham served as a judicial extern for the Honorable Joan Humphrey Lefkow of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and as an associate editor of the Northwestern University Law Review. Mr. Lanham received his B.A. magna cum laude with distinction from The Colorado College. At Colorado College, Mr. Lanham was inducted into Phi Beta Kappa and received the Clyde Agustus Duniway history prize and the Robert J. Cosgrove Research Fellowship.

DNA Genotek, Inc. v. Ancestry.com DNA LLC
(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.
Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC et al. v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc. et al.
(Central District of California). Represented several Alcon entities in patent litigation regarding femtosecond lasers for eye surgery. Prevailed on summary judgment that the three asserted patents were not infringed by the accused devices.
Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.
(District of Nevada). Represented Sandoz in Hatch-Waxman litigation regarding the company’s application to sell an injectable oncology drug. Of the 14 claims originally asserted by Spectrum against Sandoz’s proposed generic version of levoleucovorin, successfully eliminated all but two claims before trial. After a five-day bench trial, the court found clear and convincing evidence of obviousness and invalidated the remaining two claims.
International Chamber of Commerce Arbitration
Represented international corporations in a multi-year arbitration in connection with the operation of an open-pit mine. Obtained a favorable award for the clients, along with the rejection of the respondent’s counterclaims, and subsequently obtained confirmation and judgment on the entire award.
Television Distribution and Video Services Technology Patent Litigation
Represented communications companies in connection with patent litigation regarding television distribution and video services technology.
Securities Exchange Act and Colorado Securities Act Shareholder Action
Represented a healthcare firm and certain of its officers and directors in connection with a shareholder action brought under the federal Securities Exchange Act and the Colorado Securities Act.
Securities and Exchange Commission Investigation
Represented members of a public company’s audit committee in connection with a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation regarding executive compensation.
DNA Genotek, Inc. v. Ancestry.com DNA LLC
(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.
Lawrence Livermore National Security LLC et al. v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc. et al.
(Central District of California). Represented several Alcon entities in patent litigation regarding femtosecond lasers for eye surgery. Prevailed on summary judgment that the three asserted patents were not infringed by the accused devices.
Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.
(District of Nevada). Represented Sandoz in Hatch-Waxman litigation regarding the company’s application to sell an injectable oncology drug. Of the 14 claims originally asserted by Spectrum against Sandoz’s proposed generic version of levoleucovorin, successfully eliminated all but two claims before trial. After a five-day bench trial, the court found clear and convincing evidence of obviousness and invalidated the remaining two claims.
International Chamber of Commerce Arbitration
Represented international corporations in a multi-year arbitration in connection with the operation of an open-pit mine. Obtained a favorable award for the clients, along with the rejection of the respondent’s counterclaims, and subsequently obtained confirmation and judgment on the entire award.
Television Distribution and Video Services Technology Patent Litigation
Represented communications companies in connection with patent litigation regarding television distribution and video services technology.
Securities Exchange Act and Colorado Securities Act Shareholder Action
Represented a healthcare firm and certain of its officers and directors in connection with a shareholder action brought under the federal Securities Exchange Act and the Colorado Securities Act.
Securities and Exchange Commission Investigation
Represented members of a public company’s audit committee in connection with a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation regarding executive compensation.

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.