FacultyFaculty/Author Profile

Michael K. Levy

Kenyon & Kenyon LLP

New York, NY, USA

Since joining Kenyon & Kenyon in 1999, Michael Levy has concentrated on patent litigation, client counseling, opinion work, due diligence, portfolio management and patent prosecution in the pharmaceutical, drug delivery, medical device, and chemical process fields.

Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Levy practiced intellectual property law in Philadelphia focusing on patent prosecution and litigation covering a wide variety of disciplines, including pharmaceuticals, coatings, microchip manufacturing, specialty chemicals and alternative energy technologies. Mr. Levy began his legal career practicing environmental law, particularly addressing liability and insurance coverage issues stemming from environmental contamination. Before attending law school, Mr. Levy worked as an engineer for an environmental and occupational health and safety consulting firm.

His representative matters include:

Warner-Lambert Company, et al v. Purepac Pharmaceutical, et al. (D.N.J) – Obtained a favorable settlement for Teva Pharmaceuticals ending over ten years of extremely hard-fought litigation against Pfizer regarding Gabapentin, Teva’s AB-rated generic equivalent to Pfizer’s Neurontin®. The settlement agreement ending this case was reached just two weeks into a jury trial that had been scheduled to last seven weeks.

Boston Sci Scimed, et al v. Cordis Corporation, et al. (D. Del.) – Achieved significant victory in stent patent litigation. A jury found that Johnson & Johnson's CYPHER(r) drug-eluting stent infringes Boston Scientific's U.S. Patent 6,120,536. The jury also upheld the validity of the patent.

Purdue Research Foundation v. Sanofi-Synthelabo, S.A. (D.D.C.) – The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed Purdue Research Foundation's case against our client Sanofi-Synthelabo, for lack of personal jurisdiction. The case involved a claim by Purdue for compensation for a cold remedy called pleconaril, which is patented by Sanofi. The decision follows an earlier victory for Sanofi in a related case in Indiana. The D.C. case becomes one of the few decisions addressing jurisdiction over non-resident patentees (35 U.S.C. § 293).

Purdue Research Foundation v. Sanofi-Synthelabo, S.A. (7th Cir.) – The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court decision and dismissed the case, involving a patented anti-viral compound, against our client, Sanofi Syntholabo, S.A. (headquartered in Paris, France) for lack of personal jurisdiction in Indiana.

New York
Registered Patent Attorney: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

New York State Bar Association; Chair, Chemical / Pharmaceutical Committee (2008-2011), New York Intellectual Property Law Association; Barrister, William C. Conner Inn of Court

J.D., University of Maryland, 1995
M.S., Chemical Engineering, University of Virginia, 1992
B.S., Chemistry, Franklin & Marshall College, 1990

  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.