Tamara Fraizer is a Principal in Fish & Richardson’s Silicon Valley office in California. Her practice encompasses IP counseling, patent dispute resolution, and post-grant review. She has prosecuted patents before the USPTO, tried cases in the US International Trade Commission, and litigated in California state courts and federal district courts across the country.
Dr. Fraizer’s focus is on the life sciences, software & analytics, and consumer products, especially those relating to health care. She began her career as an academic researcher and lecturer in population biology, with emphasis on statistics, data analysis, and computer modeling. She maintains technical interests in these areas and, more generally, in the business of healthcare, wellness, and the Internet of Things. Dr. Fraizer is the head of the firm’s Digital Practice group.
Dr. Fraizer has litigated numerous patent infringement cases involving a diversity of technologies, businesses, and products. For example, Dr. Fraizer has handled patent infringement cases involving:
- Biomedical devices
- Proteins and pharmaceuticals
- Automated light switches and door openers
- Internet security systems
- Database management systems
Relationships and a strong work ethic are important to Dr. Fraizer. She appreciates the need to understand and meet her clients’ goals, without compromising solid knowledge of the facts and sound application of the law. She sponsors Fish & Richardson’s Life Sciences at the Bar seminars, writes and speaks on current legal issues, and regularly attends forums in the Valley focused on entrepreneurship and innovation.
Allergan Sales, LLC v. Alcon, Akorn, and Apotex (E.D. Texas) (ophthalmic NSAID formulation). Represented Allergan in assertion of newly issued patents on its Acular LS product against three companies having generic versions already on the market. All cases settled favorably late in discovery or after Markman order.
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.
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.
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.
Walker Digital v. Microsoft et al. (D. Del.) (internet technologies relating to maps, advertising, and gaming). Defended Microsoft in series of seven cases brought by Walker Digital against Microsoft and various other internet and technology companies. Obtained dismissal, stipulated judgment, or stay with favorable reexamination decision in six cases; seventh case in progress.
Financial Systems Technologies et al. v. Microsoft (N.D. Ill.) (relational databases). Defended Microsoft against claims of infringement of early 1990s patent on certain aspects of relational databases. Case settled favorably with limited discovery.
Hubbell Building Automation v. The Watt Stopper (W.D. Texas) (circuits and adaptive functionality for automated light switches). Defended and asserted patents of The Watt Stopper in multi-patent litigation between competitors concerning their occupancy sensor light switch products. Resolved favorably prior to trial.
Chamberlain Group, Inc., et al. v. Lear Corporation et al. (N.D. Ill.) (garage door security technology) Represented Johnson Controls Interiors, licensee of The Chamberlain Group, in a patent infringement action concerning security algorithm software and transmitter hardware for use in garage door technology. Resolved to the satisfaction of client prior to trial.
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.
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.
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 semiconductor 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.
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.
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.
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.
February 3, 2015
No Excuses! When It Comes to Trademark Infringement, Sue Fast or Stand Down
Authors: Tamara Fraizer, PhD, Lisa Greenwald-Swire
December 30, 2014
Wireless Medical Devices Conference 2014
Authors: Keith A. Barritt, Tamara Fraizer, PhD
November 11, 2014
Rights to Your Genomic Information
Author: Tamara Fraizer, PhD
June 27, 2014
Four legal challenges Digital Health companies might face
Author: Tamara Fraizer, PhD
June 26, 2014
Rise of the machines
March 4, 2014
The Clients Are Real, the Pitches Are Just for Practice
February 3, 2014
The dynamic IP landscape of today: Personalized medicine
Author: Tamara Fraizer, PhD
March 15, 2013
U.S. v. Caronia: What are the Implications?
September 26, 2011
Navigating Between German And US Discovery Provision
January 1, 2009
New Principals Announced