Tafas v. Dudas et al

Filing 201

Memorandum in Support re 200 MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed by Bar Association of the District of Columbia. (Bertin, Robert)

Tafas v. Dudas et al

Doc. 201

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 1 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division TRIANTAFYLLOS TAFAS, Plaintiff, v. JON W. DUDAS, Defendant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No. 1:07cv846(JCC/TRJ)

CONSOLIDATED WITH SMITHKLINE BEECHUM CORPORATION, d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE, Plaintiff, v. JON W. DUDAS, Defendant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No. 1:07cv1008(JCC/TRJ)

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION OF AMICUS CURIAE BAR ASSOCIATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF REGARDING THE EFFECTS OF THE FINAL RULES ON ESTABLISHED PATENT LAW AND PROSECUTION The Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Section (PTC Section) of the Bar Association of the District of Columbia ("BADC"), moves for leave to file a brief as amicus curie in this action to detail ways in which the Final Rules conflict with the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., and established patent prosecution practices, and the loss of patent rights that will result.

-1Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 2 of 9

The PTC section of the BADC is one of the senior-most intellectual property bar associations in the United States, drawing its membership from government, industry and private practice. The BADC and its members have a substantial interest in the adjudication of

significant issues that define our patent laws and practice, and submit amicus curiae briefs when issues of importance arise. The interest of the BADC here is entirely pro bono, to advance the development of laws and regulations that promote the progress of science and useful arts through the patent process. The decision to allow a non-party to participate as amicus curiae comes within the broad discretion of the court. DeJulio v. Georgia, 127 F. Supp. 2d 1274, 1284 (N.D. Ga. 2001). Accord Citizens Against Casino Gambling in Erie County v. Kempthorne, 471 F. Supp. 2d 295, 311 (W.D.N.Y. 2007). "A court may grant leave to appear as an amicus if the information offered is `timely and useful." Waste Mgmt. of Pennsylvania v. City of York, 162 F.R.D. 34 (M.D. Pa. 1995); Fluor Corp. & Affiliates v. United States, 35 Fed. Cl. 284, 285 (1996) (fording that filing of amicus brief in midst of parties' briefing of cross-motions for summary judgment was timely). Amicus curiae briefing should be allowed where, as here, the amicus curiae can "offer insights not available from the parties" or can provide "unique information or perspective that can help the court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties are able to provide." Citizens Against Gambling, 471 F. Supp. 2d. at 311 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In addition, non-party participants have "been allowed at the trial level where they provide helpful analysis of the law [or] they have a special interest in the subject matter of the suit," among other reasons. Bryant v. Better Business Bureau, 923 F. Supp. 720, 727 (D. Md. 1996) (internal citations omitted). The BADC wishes to submit a brief addressing the ways in which the Final Rules contravene the existing framework of the Patent Act with adverse consequences for the use of the

-2-

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 3 of 9

patent system to both protect invention and encourage the disclosure to the public of significant innovations. The BADC believe that it possesses a unique perspective on this issue not otherwise available to the Court because of, among other things, its submission of comments to the PTO on the rules initially proposed by the PTO, its long involvement and focus on patent and patent law and input from its members, who include many practitioners who have actively prepared and prosecuted patent applications before the PTO for many years, and many of whom have worked at the PTO. The BADC's proposed amicus curie brief is attached as Exhibit A to the BADC's Motion, and the BADC respectfully requests that the Court accept the brief for filing without requiring that it be filed separately. Counsel for the GSK Plaintiffs in C.A. No. 1:07cv 1008 and for Mr. Tafas in C.A. No. 1:07cv846 have been contacted and have consented to the filing of this brief. Counsel for Defendants have advised that Defendants express no position on this motion but will not require oral argument on the BADC's motion for leave. In light of the parties' views on this motion for leave, no hearing is requested.

-3-

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 4 of 9

CONCLUSION For all of the foregoing reasons, the Bar Association of the District of Columbia requests that the Court grant its motion for leave and permit the filing of the amicus brief by the time set by the Court for the filing of such briefs, as provided by the proposed Order submitted with the motion.

Respectfully submitted, __________/s/ Robert C. Bertin Virginia Bar No. 41,278 Attorney for amicus curiae Bar Assn. of the District of Columbia BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP 2020 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006-1806 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] email: [e-mail] President, BADC PTC Section Of Counsel Joslyn Barritt POWELL GOLDSTEIN LLP 901 New York Avenue NW Washington DC 20001 Co-Chair Patent Committee, BADC PTC Section Vandana Koelsch HOWREY LLP 1299 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20004 Chair Amicus Curiae Committee, BADC PTC Section

-4-

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 5 of 9

Dan Salehi, Esq. SNELL & WILMER LLP 600 Anton Blvd., Suite 1400 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Co-Chair Patent Committee, BADC PTC Section Attorneys for Amicus Curie Bar Association of the District of Columbia Patent, Trademark, & Copyright Section

-5-

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 6 of 9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 27th day of December 2007, the foregoing pleading was filed electronically using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification by electronic means to the following counsel of record: Joseph D. Wilson Kelley Drye & Warren LLP 3050 K Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20007-5108 email: [e-mail] Attorney for Plaintiff in CA. No. 1: 07cv846 Elizabeth M. Locke Kirkland & Ellis LLP 655 15th Street, NW - Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20005 email: [e-mail] and Craig C. Reilly Richard McGettigan Reilly & West PC 1725 Duke Street - Suite 600 Alexandria, VA 22314 email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs in CA. No. 1: 07ev1008 (JCC/TRI) Chuck Rosenberg United States Attorney Lauren A. Wetzler R. Joseph Sher Andrew Price Assistant United States Attorneys United States Attorney's Office 2100 Jamison Ave. Alexandria, VA 22314 email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants in CA. Nos. 1: 07cv846 and 1: 07cv1008

1

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 7 of 9

Rebecca Malkin Carr Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 2300 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20037 email: [e-mail] and Scott J. Pivnick Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 1650 Tysons Boulevard McLean, VA 22102-4856 email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Amicus Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. James Murphy Dowd Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr, LLP 1455 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 email: [e-mail] Attorney for Amicus Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America Dawn-Marie Bey Kirkpatrick Stockton LLP 700 13th Street, NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005 email: [e-mail] Attorney for Amici Hexas, LLC The Roskamp Institute, and Tikvah Therapeutics, Inc. Randall Karl Miller Arnold & Porter, LLP 1600 Tysons Boulevard Suite 900 McLean, VA 22102 email: [e-mail] Attorney for Amicus Biotechnology Industry Organization and Amicus Monsanto Company

2

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 8 of 9

Charles Gorenstin Birch, Stewart, Kolasch and Birch, LLP 8110 Gatehouse Road Suite 100 East Falls Church, VA 22042 email: [e-mail] Attorney for Amicus Intellectual Property Institute Williams Mitchell College of Law Thomas J. O'Brien Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington D.C. 20004 email: to'[e-mail] Attorneys for Amicus Curiae American Intellectual Property Law Association R. Danny Huntington Bingham & McCutchen LLP 2020 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Amicus Curie Féderation Internationale Des Conseils En Propriété Industrielle Matthew Schruers Computer & Communications Industry Association 900 17th Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Amici Curie Public Patent Foundation, Computer & Communications Industry Association, AARP, Consumer Federation of America, Essential Action, Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge, Knowledge Ecology International Prescription Access Litigation, Public Knowledge, Research on Innovation, and Software Freedom Law Center

3

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 201

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 9 of 9

______/s/ Robert C. Bertin Virginia Bar No. 41,278 Attorney for amicus curiae Bar Assn. of the District of Columbia BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP 2020 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006-1806 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] email: [e-mail]

4