Professional experience
Tamara Fraizer is a Principal in Fish & Richardson’s Silicon Valley office. Her practice emphasizes patent litigation and spans the realms of biology and information technology.

Dr. Fraizer's experience includes litigations pertaining to genetically engineered proteins, bioassays, and biomedical devices as well as those pertaining to semiconductor design and manufacture, electronic storage devices, and software. Dr. Fraizer has tried intellectual property cases in federal district courts and the U.S. International Trade Commission. She has additional experience in the prosecution of patents in the areas of software, bioinformatics, and mathematical biology.

Prior to law school, Dr. Fraizer was a lecturer in Biology and Ecology at the University of California (Davis and Santa Cruz), and conducted scientific research involving field work, computer programming, and mathematical and statistical modeling.

Litigation examples
Hubbell Building Automation v. The Watt Stopper (W.D. Texas) (circuits and adaptive functionality for automated light switches). Defending and asserting patents of The Watt Stopper in multi-patent litigation between competitors concerning their occupancy sensor light switch products.

In re Certain Probe Card Assemblies, Components Thereof and Certain Tested DRAM and NAND Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Same (International Trade Commission) (probe cards for testing semiconductory wafers). Successfully defended Micronics Japan Co., Ltd. in multi-patent investigation brought by FormFactor, Inc. concerning the design, manufacture, and use of probe card assemblies. Invalidated claims of two patents and demonstrated no infringement of any of the asserted patents, with determination affirmed by the ITC in November 2009.

Synopsys Inc. v. Magma Design Automation (D. Delaware) (electronic design automatic software). Represented Magma in assertion of patent infringement claims implicating Synopsys’s popular chip design software. Case settled after Markman hearing and expert reports.

Invitrogen Corp. v. Clontech Laboratories, Inc. (D. Maryland) (genetically modified polymerase). Represented Clontech, taking over long-standing litigation between the parties after appeal to the Federal Circuit. Conducted trial focused on inventorship of RNase H minus reverse transcriptase and potential damages. Case settled during trial.

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation (D. Delaware) (circuits for PWM controllers). Successfully asserted Power Integrations, Inc. patents relating to circuits used in power supplies. Jury found that Fairchild had willfully infringed all four Power Integrations patents asserted in the case, and awarded Power Integrations damages of $34 million. A second jury found all asserted claims not invalid.

Padcom, Inc. v. NetMotion Wireless, Inc. (D. Delaware) (software for wireless communications). Defended NetMotion Wireless in patent infringement suit brought by competitor Padcom. Parties merged after trial.

In re Certain Power Supply Controllers and Products Containing Same (International Trade Commission) (circuits for PWM controllers). Represented Power Integrations, Inc. in assertion of patents on circuits used in power supplies. Prevailed at trial in the ITC, where the patents were found to be valid and infringed, and obtained order excluding downstream products from importation into the United States. Decision upheld on appeal to the Federal Circuit.

Stratagene Corp. v. Takara Holdings, Inc. and Takara Bio (S.D. California and D. Maryland) (polymerase blends for use in PCR). Represented Takara Bio in case involving inventorship and ownership dispute. Obtained favorable cross-license and settlement.

Motorola, Inc. and Freescale Semiconductor v. Micron Technology, Inc. (W.D. Wisconsin and W.D. Texas) (semiconductors and telecommunications software). Represented Micron in multi-forum dispute initiated by Motorola, involving 34 patents on various technologies used in cell phones. Case settled favorably.

Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Cardinal Health, Inc., et al. (D. Del.) (methods and compositions for treatment of the skin). Defended AP Pharma in one of many multi-party litigations brought by Tristrata. Successfully limited potential liability. Case settled.

Caliper Technologies Corp. v. Molecular Devices Corp. (N.D. California) (fluorescence polarization assay for kinase reaction). Defended Molecular Devices in patent infringement suit brought by Caliper. Defeated preliminary injunction motion. Case settled after Markman hearing.

Genzyme Corp. v. Genentech, Inc. (D. Delaware) (genetically modified tissue plasminogen activator). Represented Genzyme in assertion of patents against Genentech, implicating products used for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Case settled for favorable cross-license.

Selected publications
Opening Remarks, Across the Valley of Death: Biotech Innovation Bridges the Gap in Early Stage Funding, Bay Area BioForum, San Francisco, California (June 20, 2007).

Quick Patent Verdicts: Patent Local Rules, Rocket Dockets, and the ITC, Berkley Law and Technology Center, UC Berkeley School of Law, University of California at Berkley (February 20, 2007).

Nuts and Bolts of Enforcing Patent and Trade Secret Rights, California State Bar IP Institute, Santa Barbara, California (November 2, 2006).

Bar admissions
Admitted to the bar in California.
Registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Additional information
Member of the American Bar Association and the American Intellectual Property Law Association.
National Institute for Trial Advocacy: Trial Skills Program, June 2006, San Francisco, California.