Parisa Jorjani

Parisa Jorjani

Of Counsel

San Francisco, (415) 268-6576

Education

University of California, Berkeley (B.S., 1996)
University of California, Hastings College of the Law (J.D., 1999)

Bar Admissions

California
U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

Parisa Jorjani is of counsel in the firm’s Intellectual Property Group. Ms. Jorjani focuses her practice on patent litigation, primarily representing life sciences companies, and has experience with all aspects of patent litigation, from initial case assessment through trial, appeals to the Federal Circuit, and the Supreme Court.

Her patent litigation practice includes district court, arbitration and appellate experience, as well as experience in related proceedings, such as inter partes review, reexamination requests, interference proceedings and interference appeals. Her cases have involved a variety of life sciences and medical device technologies, from monoclonal antibodies and small molecules to HIV diagnosis kits and beating heart surgery devices. She has achieved favorable results for clients, such as winning motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, obtaining findings of noninfringement, invalidity, and inequitable conduct, and both upholding and invalidating patent claims in Patent Office proceedings. Ms. Jorjani also has experience in district court and appellate proceedings under the Hatch-Waxman Act.

Ms. Jorjani is a registered patent attorney admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). She is also a member of the firm’s Inter Partes Review and Post Grant Practice, which was formed to help companies navigate the new adversarial proceedings instituted by the America Invents Act.

Ms. Jorjani earned a bachelor’s of science degree in chemical engineering (with an emphasis in biotechnology) from the University of California at Berkeley. Prior to law school, Ms. Jorjani worked as a research associate in the Process Development group at Bayer Healthcare, where she focused on the design, execution and scale-up of novel fermentation processes. Ms. Jorjani received her law degree cum laude from Hastings College of the Law, where she was a member of the Communications and Entertainment Law Journal. Ms. Jorjani also served as a judicial extern for the Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel, former Chief Judge of the Northern District of California. Before joining the firm, Ms. Jorjani practiced patent prosecution and trademark litigation at a boutique IP firm in San Francisco.

Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. et al.
(Northern District of California). Represented Bayer Healthcare in patent litigation involving diabetes test strips, as well as the subsequent Federal Circuit appeal and hearing en banc. Case was decided favorably for the client the after trial on inequitable conduct, ultimately resulting in a shift in the legal standard for inequitable conduct.
Estech v. Medtronic
(Northern District of California). Represented Medtronic in a patent infringement suit involving Estech’s minimally invasive beating heart surgery devices. Case settled on favorable terms.
Chang v. Luciw
(U.S. Patent and Trademark Office). Represented client in major patent interference involving blood screening diagnostic for HIV. The USPTO issued a 122-page opinion in the client’s favor.
Confidential Life Sciences Arbitration
(Arbitration)  Represented multinational corporation in the medical field in arbitration with potential damages in the nine-figures. A three-arbitrator panel ruled in our client’s favor on every patent; an unusually complete victory for one side in the arbitration context.
MedImmune, Inc. v. Celltech R&D, Ltd.
(District of Columbia). Represented Celltech in patent litigation involving humanized monoclonal antibodies. Case settled on favorable terms.
Takeda, Inc. v. Impax Laboratories
(Northern District of California). Represented Impax in two patent litigation matters against Takeda brought under the Hatch-Waxman Act, involving Impax’s proposed generic product for the treatment of acid reflux disease. Prevailed on summary judgment of noninfringement of patent with latest expiration date in the first case, ultimately resulting in cases settling on favorable terms.
Allergan Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories and Sandoz Inc.
(Eastern District of Texas). Represented Alcon and Sandoz in a patent litigation matter brought under the Hatch-Waxman Act, involving glaucoma eye drops. Worked as part of trial team which assumed case from prior counsel who lost first trial, leading to noninfringement verdict after convincing court to order a new trial.
Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. et al.
(Northern District of California). Represented Bayer Healthcare in patent litigation involving diabetes test strips, as well as the subsequent Federal Circuit appeal and hearing en banc. Case was decided favorably for the client the after trial on inequitable conduct, ultimately resulting in a shift in the legal standard for inequitable conduct.
Estech v. Medtronic
(Northern District of California). Represented Medtronic in a patent infringement suit involving Estech’s minimally invasive beating heart surgery devices. Case settled on favorable terms.
Chang v. Luciw
(U.S. Patent and Trademark Office). Represented client in major patent interference involving blood screening diagnostic for HIV. The USPTO issued a 122-page opinion in the client’s favor.
Confidential Life Sciences Arbitration
(Arbitration)  Represented multinational corporation in the medical field in arbitration with potential damages in the nine-figures. A three-arbitrator panel ruled in our client’s favor on every patent; an unusually complete victory for one side in the arbitration context.
MedImmune, Inc. v. Celltech R&D, Ltd.
(District of Columbia). Represented Celltech in patent litigation involving humanized monoclonal antibodies. Case settled on favorable terms.
Takeda, Inc. v. Impax Laboratories
(Northern District of California). Represented Impax in two patent litigation matters against Takeda brought under the Hatch-Waxman Act, involving Impax’s proposed generic product for the treatment of acid reflux disease. Prevailed on summary judgment of noninfringement of patent with latest expiration date in the first case, ultimately resulting in cases settling on favorable terms.
Allergan Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories and Sandoz Inc.
(Eastern District of Texas). Represented Alcon and Sandoz in a patent litigation matter brought under the Hatch-Waxman Act, involving glaucoma eye drops. Worked as part of trial team which assumed case from prior counsel who lost first trial, leading to noninfringement verdict after convincing court to order a new trial.

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.