![Stephen B. Maebius Foley Lardner Intellectual Property Lawyer](https://www.natlawreview.com/sites/default/files/styles/author_profile/public/images/MAEBIUSS.jpg?itok=IXhQLiXJ)
Stephen (Steve) B. Maebius is a partner and intellectual property lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP. He has led teams within Foley handling a variety of different kinds of IP work, including IP due diligence reviews, infringement and validity opinions, international portfolio management, licensing, litigation with parallel inter partes reviews, reexaminations and interferences, and pharmaceutical patent term extensions. Two IP transactions in which Mr. Maebius has participated were awarded "Deal of Distinction" status by the Licensing Executives Society. He is a former member of the firm’s Management Committee and former chair of the Intellectual Property Department. Prior to becoming a lawyer, he was a patent examiner in the Biotechnology Group of the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office.
Representative Matters
- Lead counsel in successful defense of 6 Inter Partes Reviews filed by generic petitioners against a family of Orange Book-listed pharmaceutical patents covering a $1B controlled release product with parallel Hatch-Waxman litigation (IPR2013-00368, IPR2013-00371, and IPR2013-00372 - instituted but all claims found patentable in final written decision; IPR2015-01777, IPR2015-01778, and IPR2015-01782 - not instituted)
- Prosecuted product-by-process patent listed in Orange Book that was upheld as valid and infringed in United Therapeutics v. Sandoz, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121573 (D.N.J. Aug. 29, 2014)
- Co-counsel for successful petitioner in Inter Partes Review filed against patent asserted in litigation against LED client (IPR2012-00005; decision affirmed on appeal)
- Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. v. John Doll (Fed. Cir. 2009) – co-counsel in precedential 2-1 decision remanding a double patenting rejection arising from patent reexamination (all claims confirmed to be patentable upon remand to the Patent Office)
- Goldenberg & Immunomedics v. Cytogen & C.R. Bard (Fed. Cir. 2004) – co-counsel on appeal in reversal of summary judgment in client's favor in precedential 2-1 decision on doctrine of equivalents issue
More Legal and Business Bylines From Stephen B. Maebius
- Federal Circuit Again Reverses PTAB Obviousness Determination - (Posted On Tuesday, February 14, 2017)
- Federal Circuit Finds IPR Petitioner Lacks Standing To Appeal - (Posted On Tuesday, January 10, 2017)
- Sovereign Immunity of State Universities: Can It Shield Them from AIA Patent Challenges? - (Posted On Wednesday, October 05, 2016)
- Estoppel Prevents Second IPR Petition Even When New References Were Missed By First Search - (Posted On Tuesday, August 30, 2016)
- CRISPR Update – July 2016 - (Posted On Friday, July 29, 2016)
- Magnum Offers New Path for Challenging AIA Decisions: Burden of Production - (Posted On Wednesday, July 27, 2016)
- Survey of Pharmaceutical IPRs Filed By Generic Drug Company Petitioners - (Posted On Wednesday, June 08, 2016)
- Are Drug Prices Really Too High? - (Posted On Thursday, May 05, 2016)
- Reading Cuozzo Tea Leaves: Best Practices for IPR Proceedings Pending Supreme Court's Decision - (Posted On Wednesday, April 27, 2016)
- Guarding Against Conclusory Statements & Why It Matters Even More Under New PTAB Rules - (Posted On Thursday, April 07, 2016)