Anne Brody is Of Counsel at Gibson Dunn’s Orange County Office, where she is a member of the firm’s Intellectual Property and Life Sciences Practice Groups.  After earning a Ph.D. in chemistry, Anne focuses on patent litigation and complex commercial disputes in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.  She has represented clients in matters involving a range of therapies and technologies, such as genetically modified T-cell therapies, biologics, peptide drugs, small molecules, and diagnostic technology platforms and methods. Anne has extensive experience in various aspects of IP-related litigation from pre-suit investigation to trial. She also assists clients with corporate transactions involving intellectual property rights, including asset purchase, licensing, and settlements.

Anne is a board member and a Co-Chair for the ChIPs Orange County Chapter, a nonprofit advancing women in IP and technology law and policy, and a Barrister of the Howard T. Markey Intellectual Property Inn of Court in Orange County.  She is a patent attorney admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Beyond her legal work, Anne is committed to supporting young adults with special needs to reach their full potential and actively engages with local communities to assist their families.

Before joining Gibson Dunn, Anne was a research scientist developing new diagnostic tools and tests. She earned a Bachelor of Science degree in chemistry with high honors from University of California, Berkeley and a doctorate degree in chemistry from California Institute of Technology. Her thesis work involved protein engineering, synthetic biology, and the development of microfluidic devices for these studies.

Representative Patent Litigation Matters

• Representing a global pharmaceutical company against multiple generic defendants enforcing patents covering targeted molecular therapies for acute myeloid leukemia and advanced systemic mastocytosis.
• Defended a global diagnostic company where plaintiff alleged trade secret misappropriation, patent ownership, and inventorship of patents covering liquid biopsies for cancers.
• Defended a global diagnostic company where plaintiff alleged infringement of a patent covering prenatal cell-free DNA testing.
• Defended and obtained summary judgment in favor of our client (global pharmaceutical company) in which the Court found that the plaintiff was estopped from correcting inventorship and/or claiming ownership of our client’s patents on a low-dose treatment using a small peptide drug.
• Represented a global pharmaceutical company in patent infringement litigation and inter partes reviews of patents covering protein vaccines and vaccination protocols.
• Member of a trial team for a global pharmaceutical company in a consolidated Hatch-Waxman case on a patent covering a lower dose formulation and obtained judgment that the asserted patent claims were not invalid and were infringed, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
• Defended a leading global company in laboratory technology platforms and services where plaintiff alleged infringement of patents covering mass spectrometers and methods of use.

Representative Antitrust-Pharma Litigation Matters

• Defended our client (global pharmaceutical company) in a federal antitrust litigation where plaintiffs alleged Walker Process fraud, sham patent litigation, and sham citizen’s petitions concerning a complex peptide formulation.
• Defended our client (global pharmaceutical company) in a federal antitrust litigation where plaintiffs alleged an unlawful reverse payment settlement agreement to delay generic competition concerning a cholesterol-lowering drug.
• Defended for our client (global pharmaceutical company) in a federal antitrust litigation where plaintiffs alleged Sherman Act Section 1 claims, sham patent litigation, product-hopping, and Walker Process fraud concerning a higher dose formulation.
• Member of a trial team for a French multinational pharmaceutical company that obtained dismissal of a federal False Claims Act case in which the underlying patent-at-issue involved a biologic Lovenox, which was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.