Los Angeles Office
Lauren is an intellectual property partner in Orrick’s Los Angeles office. With a background in biochemistry and molecular biology, Lauren handles complex patent litigation and patent post-grant proceedings.
Lauren has represented clients in connection with a broad spectrum of technologies, ranging from central nervous system stimulants to immunotherapies and monoclonal antibody medications to anti-angiogenesis drugs in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.
She was recognized by Law360’s Rising Stars as “one of the top intellectual property attorneys under the age of 40” in 2019. Lauren was also named to Benchmark Litigation’s "40 and Under Hot List," which honors the achievements of the nation’s most accomplished litigators under 40.
Peter v. NantKwest/NantKwest v. Lee. Represented NantKwest before the district court, Federal Circuit, and Supreme Court in a 35 U.S.C. § 145 action relating to natural killer cell based therapies for cancer and the Patent and Trademark Office's ability to recover attorneys' fees under § 145. Ultimately, the Supreme Court unanimously sided with NantKwest, and struck down the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's policy that applicants who appeal to a district court must foot the agency's attorneys' fees.
Celltrion v. Genentech. Defended Genentech and Biogen in connection with 25 IPR petitions in the PTAB for multiple patents relating to methods of using Rituxan. Only 2 of the 25 proceedings resulted in loss of patent claims in final written decisions.
PDL BioPharma v. Merck. Secured a $19.5 million lump sum payment from Merck to settle PDL BioPharma's lawsuit filed in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey alleging that Merck's manufacture of its cancer drug Keytruda infringed a foundational patent relating to the humanization of recombinant antibodies. The case settled little more than one year after it was filed, following the claim construction hearing.
Ariosa Diagnostics v. Sequenom. Represented Ariosa in patent litigation against Sequenom. Ariosa brought an early summary judgment motion, and the court invalidated Sequenom's patent because it attempted to cover a natural phenomenon, which is not patent-eligible. The decision gave Ariosa a complete victory and was affirmed by the Federal Circuit in a precedential opinion.
PDL BioPharma v. Genentech (arbitration). Represented PDL BioPharma, which pioneered technology relating to humanization of recombinant antibodies, in a complex breach of contract matter. The matter settled on terms favorable to PDL.
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals v. Genentech. Represented Regeneron Pharmaceuticals in connection with a patent case in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York relating to Regeneron's Eylea and Zaltrap anti-angiogenesis drugs.