Melinda Patterson is a partner in the firm’s Houston office whose practice is devoted to patent litigation, primarily in the biotechnology field. She has directed technical and legal strategies for numerous high-stakes lawsuits involving recombinant DNA, genetically engineered plants, novel proteins, peptide and polypeptide pharmaceuticals, immunological assay procedures, vaccines, and other pharmaceuticals.
Dr. Patterson’s litigation experience includes developing the infringement and validity aspects of patent cases, including taking and yielding key fact and technical expert depositions and examination of key technical fact and expert witnesses at trial. She is experienced in all aspects of the trial process, including case preparation, discovery planning, motion writing, trial, and appellate issues.
Dr. Patterson also has experience in client counseling and opinion work and in patent office proceedings, including prosecution, reexamination, and interference proceedings.
- Monsanto Co. v. Bayer BioScience, N.V. Won a December 2005 jury trial for Monsanto finding that a patent asserted against its insect-resistant corn products was invalid and not infringed. On remand from 363 F.3d 1235 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
- Syngenta Seeds, Inc. v. Monsanto Co. et al. Won a jury trial in 2005 for Monsanto finding that three patents asserted against its insect-resistant corn products are invalid or not infringed.
- Monsanto Co. v. Bayer Bioscience, N.V. Won summary judgment in 2002 that licensor estoppel precluded a defendant from contesting the validity of asserted patents related to glyphosate herbicide-resistance genes.
- Mycogen Plant Science, Inc. v. Monsanto Co. Won summary judgment in 2001 that asserted a patent related to the design of insect-resistance genes for plants was invalid in view of Monsanto’s prior invention. The Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part on appeal. The case was ultimately dismissed on remand.
- Mycogen Plant Science, Inc. v. Monsanto Co. Won a jury trial in 1999 asserting that a patent related to the design of insect-resistance genes for plants was invalid in view of Monsanto’s prior invention. In 2001, the Federal Circuit affirmed on appeal.
- Novartis Seeds Inc. v. Monsanto Co. Won a jury verdict that a patent related to insect-resistant corn was invalid for lack of enablement. The case was subsequently settled.
- Monsanto Co. v. Eli Lilly & Co., Eli Lilly & Co. v. Monsanto Co. Patent infringement regarding BST formulation and processes for purification of protein. The case was settled.
- Calgene and Rhone-Poulenc v. Monsanto Co. Patent infringement regarding glyphosate-resistant genes in plants. The case was settled.
- Hoechst Celanese v. BP. Won summary judgment for the client. Judgment was affirmed on appeal.
- Hoeschst Celanese v. BP and Sterling Chemicals. In a patent infringement case regarding a process for purifying acetic acid, obtained a jury verdict for the client of invalidity and willful infringement and enhanced damages and costs.
Dr. Patterson received her B.S. in Microbiology, with honors, from the University of Texas. In 1982, she earned her PhD in Microbiology from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center – Dallas, and she received her J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 1987, with honors.
Dr. Patterson’s graduate education involved research in immunology and hemopoietic stem cell regulation and differentiation.
“Provisional Rights in Patent Applications.” Intellectual Property Today 17, No. 10 (October 2010).
Speeches and Publications