
New York
Kaitlyn is experienced in Hatch-Waxman litigation and inter partes review proceedings, including disputes involving drug treatments for cancer, therapeutic antibodies, and medical devices. Kaitlyn also has significant experience in IP due diligence and licensing associated with high-profile acquisitions.
Boston
Carly is a Boston-based senior associate and litigator in our Intellectual Property group. Carly’s practice focuses on patent infringement litigation in federal district courts involving pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and biologics. She has a background in biomedical engineering, including medical device research & design, academic research, and business management.
New York
Josh has been named American Lawyer's “Litigator of the Year” twice, in addition to being a finalist for 2022. In 2012, the magazine dubbed him “the Defibrillator” based on his streak of appellate wins for companies that “appeared to be at death’s door,” and in 2017 it declared, he “still deserves the moniker we once gave him.”
In 2014, The Financial Times named Josh one of the 10 most innovative lawyers in the North American legal sector for his work “demystify[ing] the technical issues” and securing a victory in the blockbuster Federal Circuit appeal, Oracle v. Google. Chambers USA has reported, “He wins accolades for his ‘brilliant analysis and judgment.’ Clients appreciate how he ‘rethinks every case from the ground up,’ and add: ‘He can take the most complicated legal or technological issue and present it in a way that seems like common sense.’” Another edition of Chambers USA added: “‘His briefs are quite simply beautiful,’” and “clients describe his courtroom presence as ‘both commanding and accessible at the same time.’ He has the ‘perfect combination of persuasiveness, intelligence, wit, and deference.’”
Josh's practice covers a wide range of subjects, including intellectual property, financial services, securities, privacy, antitrust, federal preemption, insurance law, corporate governance, criminal law, and constitutional litigation. Among his recent clients are Cisco, Credit Suisse, Cox Communications, DISH Network, Genentech, Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, JPMorgan Chase, Microsoft, Mozilla, Oracle, Sonos, and Royal Bank of Scotland.
Clients turn to Josh to win the highest stakes appeals, including appeals in cases that threaten the very survival of a business. For example:
Josh was the founding president and CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, one of the country’s foremost public interest firms. Over the course of eight years, he was the Brennan Center’s chief strategist on litigation and public policy advocacy. Before that, Josh founded the Office of the Appellate Defender, a public defender office specializing in criminal appeals.
Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C.
Steve knows how to minimize risk while delivering a client’s business objective, either by defeating an opponent’s case in court or by negotiating the best possible settlement. His ability to pinpoint the argument that will resonate with each judge and jury has enabled him to protect cutting-edge technology involving medical devices, automotive components, telecommunications standards, digital and 3D imaging, guest engagement systems, and semiconductor devices and manufacturing processes. He has also used those same skills in litigating numerous antitrust, unfair competition, and complex tort and contract cases.
For the last 20 years, Steve has focused on guiding Japanese and other Asia-based companies through patent litigation before the U.S. District Courts, ITC and Federal Circuit. He is one of only two lawyers ranked in the Chambers Global guide for having Foreign Expertise in Intellectual Property for Japan. Steve consistently has been described as a “great negotiator who is excellent at creating litigation strategy.” Clients recently interviewed by Chambers also noted, “Steve is a really fantastic tactical thinker with good legal instincts. He is also very collaborative.” Other clients have stated that “his command of the law is evident in his ability to understand it and also apply it across a wide variety of situations,“ while still others have praised his ability to make “very quick and sound tactical decisions.”
New York
With a Ph.D. in biology from MIT and the Whitehead Institute, where she was a NSF fellow, Irena represents plaintiffs and defendants in their most complex pharmaceutical and biotech patent cases. Over the last 20 years, pharmaceutical and biotechnology innovators have relied on Irena again and again for cases involving small molecules, biologics, recombinant DNA technology, gene therapy, gene editing, manufacturing processes, formulations and drug-eluting medical devices, including numerous multi-billion dollar cases involving many of the world’s best-selling drugs.
Irena has significant experience in litigation under the Hatch-Waxman Act and the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), as well as inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, license disputes and matters with parallel ex-U.S. litigation and proceedings in foreign patent offices. Irena also helps life sciences companies and organizations develop the law in the most important cases for the biopharma industry. She has been principal counsel on numerous amicus briefs to the United States Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit in key biopharma cases.
For plaintiffs, Irena has successfully defended generic challenges to patents protecting blockbuster medical therapies, including multi-billion dollar cancer, antiviral and anti-psychotic drugs. She has also represented an innovator in some of the first cases under the BPCIA, including the first involving an antibody. For defendants, she defeated a $530 million claim of patent infringement of a competitor’s biotech patent, obtaining dismissal of all claims and discovery sanctions against the patent owner. In another high-stakes case, she obtained summary judgment of noninfringement and exclusion of plaintiff’s experts under Daubert as well as a full award of attorneys’ fees.
A registered patent attorney, Irena also handles inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. For patent owners, she has obtained denial of IPR for patents protecting blockbuster drugs and has leveraged IPR for defendants to obtain freedom to operate.
Irena also coordinates U.S. proceedings with parallel ex-U.S. litigation and proceedings in foreign patent offices, recently obtaining freedom to operate for a biotech innovator’s gene therapy. She provides strategic counseling in biologics and pharmaceuticals and advises clients on their IP portfolios and transactions. Irena also represents clients in high-stakes license disputes involving biotech patents, and, in a dispute concerning the use of a recombinant protein as an enzyme replacement therapy, obtained one of the largest settlement awards over the life of the contract.
Chambers USA has recognized Irena as a leading lawyer in intellectual property, where clients have described her as “excellent,” “knowledgeable, aggressive” and “an incredibly smart lawyer.” Benchmark Litigation named her one of the “Top 250 Women in Litigation” for the last seven years and a litigation star in intellectual property in New York. Irena was also named to the Crain’s New York Business 2021 list of Notable Women in Law.
Irena writes and lectures widely on biopharma patent issues and biosimilar litigation. Irena also is frequently quoted on patent-related issues, including in the Washington Post, Financial Times, Nature Biotechnology and Pink Sheet.
Silicon Valley
As a seasoned IP litigator and counselor, Diana’s practice has run the gamut from high stakes trials, to take-down and anti-counterfeiting campaigns, to employee departure and trade secret investigations. She represents clients in District and state courts and before administrative bodies including the ITC and the USPTO. For example, Diana tried and won a complex case in which the other side sought to extend the monopoly of an expired utility patent by claiming trade dress rights in a technical product feature. Drawing upon experience handling both complex patent and trademark matters, her team successfully argued that the intersection of patent and trademark policy prevented the other side from continuing its monopoly, clearing the way for her client to enter the market. With Diana at their side, companies can rest assured that their essential assets are protected, from their core technologies, to assets including their company name, logo, and website.
While at Orrick, Diana was seconded to the City and County of San Francisco, where she had the privilege to serve as an Assistant District Attorney, and first-chair several trials. She was also seconded to Salesforce, where she learned first-hand that the law comprises just one component of a company’s overall business strategy.
Diana is also passionate about her pro bono work. For example, she represented two detainees in Guantanamo in connection with their petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, and she is currently working with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area. Before joining the firm, Diana worked for the Legal Aid of Cambodia where she assisted with the prosecution of former Khmer Rouge officials and represented individuals who sought to reclaim land rights.
Diana is a member of the International Trademark Association, of ChIPs: Advancing Women in IP and of the Harvard Club of San Francisco.
Silicon Valley
Silicon Valley
Parth’s practice combines his deep technical knowledge and his passion for zealous oral and written advocacy. With the benefit of his Master’s degree in Electrical & Computer Engineering, and engineering experience at leading software companies including Microsoft and Synopsys, Parth dives into the technical weeds and distills the issues on which a case will turn. Informed by his experiences clerking at the District of Delaware and the Federal Circuit, he understands how to convey complex technical and legal concepts in a way that persuades juries and judges.
Parth has experience at all stages of trial and appellate practice. His recent achievements include invalidating a patent claim for indefiniteness, obtaining dismissal of tortious-interference and unfair competition claims brought by a competitor against his client, and securing affirmance of an inter partes reexamination decision in an appeal he argued at the Federal Circuit.
Parth graduated with honors from Harvard Law School, where he led the submissions team for the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology and won the Irving Oberman Memorial Award for best student paper in intellectual property. Prior to law school, Parth used his technical background in computer engineering to write, prosecute, and challenge patents for clients like Apple, Becton-Dickinson, Pixar, and Visa.
San Francisco
Sarah’s practice focuses on structuring and negotiating the intellectual property aspects of complex corporate transactions, including mergers and acquisitions, business divestitures and commercial transactions where software and technology are the principal assets. Sarah also advises on intellectual property and technology contracts related questions in the context of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
Sarah routinely advises on carve-outs and business separation transactions and helps clients with structuring and implementing their intellectual property and technology separation roadmap.
Sarah has counseled several companies in their preparation for a divestiture and understands the issues a buyer is focused on in the context of intellectual property matters. She regularly helps companies implement remediation steps around their intellectual property assets to help them to a successful closing.
She has significant experience advising private equity funds on investments involving companies that are driven by technology & innovation, as well as intellectual property reliant consumer product companies and companies that are stepping into digitalization.
Sarah is also a member of Orrick’s AI leadership group and involved in thought leadership projects related to AI matters on corporate transactions.
Educated and trained in Germany, France and the United States, Sarah’s international experience provides her with additional knowledge on cross-border transactions and international matters.
Düsseldorf
Christian helps clients consider the privacy and artificial intelligence implications of new technology, supports their compliance programs, and helps them stay ahead of enforcement trends. One particular focus of his work deals with internal data transfer agreements, external data transfers with external providers, and product launches that comply with international data protection standards, as well as privacy requirements for connected cars. Furthermore, Christian provides guidance on privacy and data protection considerations for developing, acquiring, using, licensing and selling technology, data and intellectual property, including M&A transactions and IP focused joint ventures. He supports companies on the set-up of webshops, outsourcings, license agreements, in cases of trademark or unfair and deceptive trade practice issues, as well as on hard and software license and information technology (IT) project agreements.
Christian maintains strong working relationships with German data protection authorities and EU regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over privacy and data security matters. He effectively defends companies in cybersecurity and privacy-related investigations initiated by EU regulatory authorities. He also engages with authorities on behalf of clients and helps clients avoid proceedings and possible litigation. When litigation can't be avoided, Christian vigorously defends his clients.
For companies facing global cybersecurity incidents, Christian helps with crisis mitigation, including counseling on notification requirements, coordinating media strategies, and representing clients before data protection authorities in related regulatory investigations.
Christian regularly contributes practical thought leadership to global privacy industry publications and German privacy books and journals. Christian authors the Chapter V (international data transfers) of Germany’s leading GDPR commentary Kühling/Buchner (4th ed.) and is co-author to the Corporate Privacy Handbook (Betrieblicher Datenschutz). As an active member of the Sedona Conference, Christian drives the development and understanding of cross border privacy. He also participates in, hosts and moderates speaking programs with fellow private practitioners, EU data protection authorities, and academics focused on privacy and data security. Legal 500 Germany named Christian one of the top 15 practitioners in 2023 and noted that he is "a pioneer in the legal field, a data protection guru." They also recognized Christian and Orrick as "truly global" and how that it is "vital as they require the various leaders of each region to participate and bring issues to the table as a forum".
Prior to working in private practice, Christian interned with the German Federal Data Protection Commissioner and www.epic.org.
San Francisco
Amanda works on matters involving trademark and patent infringement, as well as trade secret disputes in both state and federal court. In her commercial practice, she works with technology companies on contract disputes and issues arising under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Amanda also has a robust pro bono practice and has earned High Honors through the DC Courts' Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll.
Amanda graduated with honors from The George Washington University Law School. While in law school, she externed with the Department of Justice Civil Division's IP Litigation Section.
Prior to law school, Amanda worked as a paralegal and investment management analyst at another large international firm, where she worked on regulatory and transactional matters involving mutual funds and registered investment advisers.
Orange County
Lauren supports and leads projects aimed at optimizing client service delivery and increasing efficiencies. Based in Orange County, she collaborates across offices, practice groups, and departments to streamline legal processes through the integration of technology, automation, and data-driven solutions. Her responsibilities include developing best practices, supporting the firm’s data strategy, and spearheading the rollout and adoption of legal technology within the business units.
Prior to moving into this role, Lauren was a Senior Associate in Orrick’s Securities Litigation group, where she represented and advocated for clients in complex litigation, government regulatory matters, and internal investigations. These experiences have made Lauren well-suited to design and improve client-facing solutions, create tailored workflows, and enhance collaboration with clients and third parties. Her familiarity with legal technology and enthusiasm for leveraging AI in legal services align perfectly with Orrick’s commitment to innovation.
Her diverse legal experience, combined with her proactive and innovative approach, positions her as a key player in Orrick’s ongoing efforts to lead the industry in delivering high-quality, efficient legal services.
San Francisco
Nathan represents leading technology companies and achieves results in cases where their most valuable assets are on the line. Nathan’s practice includes federal and state court litigation with an equal split between plaintiff and defense-side representations. He has obtained multiple preliminary injunctions for his clients, won dispositive motions, and represented his clients on appeal.
Nathan focuses on issues at the intersection of high technology and intellectual property law. He regularly represents and counsels clients in disputes involving software licensing, emerging aspects of trademark and copyright law, IP ownership, disputes involving technology products and IP, and open-source licensing.
As a trade secret litigator, Nathan has protected his clients’ intellectual property in fast-paced scenarios involving emergency forensic investigations followed closely by obtaining temporary restraining orders and injunctions.
Prior to joining Orrick, Nathan served as a law clerk to Judge Dorothy W. Nelson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Judge John A. Mendez of the Eastern District of California.