Jamie Wisz focuses her practice on patent prosecution, USPTO proceedings, litigation, counseling, and patent policy work in the fields of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. Her experience includes patent drafting and prosecution, portfolio management, patentability assessments, freedom-to-operate analyses, due diligence and pre-litigation investigations. Ms. Wisz's USPTO practice includes participation in reissues, reexaminations and inter partes reviews.
Ms. Wisz also has extensive experience in all aspects of intellectual property litigation, including taking and defending depositions, working with experts, and representing clients in trials and arbitration proceedings and appeals.
Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Wisz interned as a biological and economic analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency. She received her JD from Harvard Law School, where she was line editor for the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. She received an AB in Biology, magna cum laude, from Duke University where she was elected to Phi Beta Kappa.
Ms. Wisz is admitted to practice in the District of Columbia, the state of Maryland, and before the United State Patent and Trademark Office and United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Ms. Wisz is a member of the American Bar Association, the American Intellectual Property Law Association, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Bar Association and Women in Bio.
- Representing a biotechnology client in an inter partes review
- Representing a pharmaceutical company in a Hatch Waxman patent infringement case involving a treatment for HIV
- Representing a biotechnology client in a patent ownership and trade secrets dispute that resulted in a favorable judgment after a trial before the Delaware Chancery Court
- Managing a patent portfolio, including small molecules, biotechnology, and medical devices, for a university client
- Successfully obtaining a stay of a patent infringement action against a pharmaceutical company pending reexamination of the asserted patent
- Representing a pharmaceutical company in a patent infringement action involving an ANDA Paragraph IV certification concerning a treatment for Parkinson's Disease. After a bench trial, the Court issued a ruling from the bench that the opposing party had failed to carry its burden of proving that the asserted patent was invalid.
Insights & News
JD, Harvard Law School
AB, Biology, Duke University
magna cum laude
Phi Beta Kappa
District of Columbia
United States Patent and Trademark Office