Andrew T. Dufresne Ph.D.
Andy helps clients position themselves for success on appeal.
Whether an anticipated dispute, ongoing litigation, or a new engagement on appeal, Andrew Dufresne helps clients protect and advance their interests in patent litigation at the appellate and trial levels. He regularly represents Fortune 100 and 500 companies, smaller and emerging businesses, universities, and several industry and trade groups. He earned a Ph.D. in molecular genetics and microbiology and brings firsthand technical knowledge and experience to matters involving the life sciences. His clients span various technology sectors, including pharmaceuticals, biotech, food science, electronics and computer software, and fitness and sports equipment.
Andy specializes in litigating before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where he has successfully briefed and argued numerous patent cases and has extensive experience with appellate motions and mandamus practice. He also assists clients at the district court and agency levels with strategy, issue preservation, jury instructions, claim construction, dispositive motions, and post-trial briefing. In addition, he has participated in all phases of inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, including drafting petitions and other papers, conducting discovery, and presenting oral arguments.
In his active pro bono practice, Andy has successfully represented U.S. military veterans before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and the Federal Circuit in cooperation with the Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program. He has also served as court-appointed appellate counsel for defendants in criminal matters and worked with The Access Project in support of the Rising Scholars Network Clean Slate Program.
Education & Credentials
Education
- UC Berkeley School of Law, J.D.
- Duke University, Ph.D., Molecular Genetics and Microbiology
- Gustavus Adolphus College, B.A., Biology; Chemistry, summa cum laude
Bar and Court Admissions
-
Wisconsin
-
Minnesota
-
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
- Supreme Court of the United States
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
- U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
Related Employment
- Adjunct Professor, Patent Litigation, Marquette University Law School
Clerkships
- Hon. Alan D. Lourie, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Professional Recognition
Recognized by Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch for Litigation - Patent Law; Patent Law, 2021-2025
Listed in Wisconsin Super Lawyers, Rising Star, 2019
Impact
Professional Leadership
- Intellectual Property Owners Association, Amicus Brief Committee, Member
- Federal Circuit Bar Association, Board of Directors, Member; Regional Programs Committee, Past Chair; Mock Argument Committee, Past Vice Chair
Insights
News
Professional Experience
Appellate
Nuvo Pharmaceuticals (Ireland), et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Argued on behalf of Mylan in the Federal Circuit over patent rights to naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets (Vimovo®) used to treat the risk of ulcer formation in patients requiring long-term treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The Federal Circuit reversed the district court, holding the asserted claims of the two challenged patents invalid. Case No. 17-2473
BTG International Ltd., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Represented Mylan in a complex consolidated appeal concerning district court Hatch-Waxman litigation and related IPR proceedings. The patent at issue claimed methods for treating prostate cancer using abiraterone acetate and prednisone. The Federal Circuit issued a favorable judgment affirming that the PTAB had correctly canceled the asserted claims on obviousness grounds. Case No. 19-1147
St. Regis Mohawk Tribe and Allergan, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Represented Mylan in an appeal challenging the PTAB’s ruling that tribal sovereign immunity does not insulate patents from IPR proceedings. The appeal resulted in a favorable decision from the Federal Circuit confirming that tribal sovereign immunity does not apply to IPRs. Case Nos. 18-1638, -1639, -1640, -1641, -1642, -1643
HTC Corp., et al. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, et al.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Representing HTC in FRAND-licensing dispute relating to standard-essential patents and cellular telecommunications technology. Case No. 19-40566
Van der Hoeven Horticultural Projects B.V. v. Glass Investment Projects, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Represented patent owner on appeal following an IPR decision upholding challenged claims over the prior art. Obtained summary affirmance upholding favorable judgment on appeal. Case No. 18-2234
Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Participated in successful defense of the district court’s judgment in favor of defendants-appellees dismissing the asserted complaint for patent infringement on patent-eligibility grounds. Case No. 17-2051
Digital Media Technologies, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Represented defendants-appellees and obtained affirmance after the district court dismissed all asserted patent infringement claims for lack of patent eligibility. Case No. 17-2408
Cousin v. Wilkie
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Represented veteran seeking VA compensation for back disability associated with Korean War-era service in the U.S. Army. Argued before the Federal Circuit on the veteran’s behalf and obtained a precedential judgment reversing the VA’s denial of retrospective benefits. Case No. 17-1971
Daniel v. Armslist, LLC, et al.
Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Represented the Computer and Communications Industry Association as non-party amicus curiae. Appeal No. 2017AP000344
ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Johnson Health Tech Co.*
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Obtained summary affirmance of an IPR decision canceling all claims of the challenged patent. Case No. 15-2027
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. v. Irwin Industrial Tool Co.*
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Represented appellant and prepared briefing in an appeal from consolidated IPR decisions. Case settled prior to oral argument. Case Nos. 2017-1215, -1216
*Prior Experience
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Riddell, Inc. et al. vs. Kranos IP II Corp.
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Filed petition and argued on behalf of Riddell in IPR proceeding regarding a patent directed to sports helmet technology. Case settled after oral hearing. Case No. IPR2018-01164
Amazon Digital Services, Inc., et al. v. Uniloc Luxembourg SA
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Prepared briefing and argued at the oral hearing on behalf of petitioners in opposition to the patent owner’s motion to amend during IPR proceedings. The motion to amend was denied by the Board in a precedential order. Case No. IPR2017-00948
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. v. Allergan, Inc. and the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Represented Mylan in IPR proceedings challenging several pharmaceutical patents and opposing efforts to terminate the IPRs based on tribal sovereign immunity. Case Nos. IPR2016-01127, -01128, -01129, -01130, -01131, -013332
Dyaco International Inc. v. Johnson Health Tech Co.*
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Represented patent owner in two IPR proceedings that were terminated before institution. Case Nos. IPR2014-00754 and -00755
*Prior Experience
District Court
Kranos IP Corp. et al. v. Riddell, Inc.
Represented Riddell in successful defense against patent infringement claims relating to sports helmet technologies. Case No. 17-cv-06802
VocalTag Ltd. v. Agis Automatisering B.V.*
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
Represented defendant in patent infringement litigation and obtained favorable summary judgment order disposing of all infringement claims. Case No. 13-cv-00612
*Prior Experience
Veterans Benefits
Cousin v. Wilkie
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Represented veteran seeking VA compensation for back disability associated with Korean War-era service in the U.S. Army. Argued before the Federal Circuit on the veteran’s behalf and obtained a precedential judgment reversing the VA’s denial of retrospective benefits. Case No. 17-1971
Cousin v. Wilkie
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
Represented veteran seeking VA compensation for back disability associated with Korean War-era service in the U.S. Army on appeal from the Board of Veterans’ Appeals and on remand after obtaining a favorable decision from the Federal Circuit. Case No. 15-2175
Reed v. Shinseki*
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
Represented veteran in claim for VA disability compensation. Secured remand for further proceedings before the agency and secured a fee award under the Equal Access to Justice Act. Case No. 13-2661
*Prior Experience