Eugene Perez has practiced in the intellectual property field since 2000, specializing in chemical, pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents. His experience includes prosecuting patent applications, including corresponding with clients and preparing replies to all USPTO correspondence such as Office Actions and Restriction Requirements, initiating and conducting inter partes reviews (IPR), reissue applications, ex parte and inter partes reexamination proceedings, conducting legal research and preparing freedom-to-operate, patentability, infringement and validity opinion letters. Mr. Perez has also argued before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, as well as before the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Mr. Perez serves as the editor for BSKB’s Post Grant Proceedings website, a site devoted to post-grant patent review procedures, including IPR, post-grant reviews, patent reexamination and reissue.

Representative Matters

  • Inter partes reexamination control no. 95/000,138 (Fidia Farmaceutici S.p.A. v. Chemi S.p.A.) (USPN 6,645,742)
  • Inter partes reexamination control no. 95/000,153 (Galderma R&D v. Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Ltd.) (USPN 6,753,013)
  • Chemi S.p.A. v. Fidia Farmaceutici p.A., Appeal No. 2010-1514 (Fed. Cir.) (June 8, 2011) (argued) (on brief)
  • Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Ltd. v. Rea, Appeal No. 12-1520 (Fed. Cir.) (Aug. 12, 2013) (on brief)
  • Biomarin Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Genzyme Therapeutic Products, Ltd., IPR2013-00534, IPR2013-00537
  • Biomarin Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Duke University, IPR2013-00535
  • Genzyme Therapeutic Products, Ltd. v. Biomarin Pharmaceutical, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1720, 2015-1721 (Fed. Cir.) (on brief)
  • Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd v. Ibex PT Holdings Co., Ltd., IPR2017-00101, IPR2017-00102
  • Celanese Int’l Corp. v. Daicel Corp., IPR2017-00162, IPR2017-00163, IPR2017-00164, IPR2017-00165, IPR2017-00166
  • Duke University v. Biomarin Pharmaceutical, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1106 (Fed. Cir.) (on brief)
  • Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd v. Ibex PT Holdings Co., Ltd., IPR2018-00011, IPR2018-00012, IPR2018-00092, IPR2018-00093 (PTAB) (Decisions Denying Patent Owner Request for Rehearing, Aug. 27, 2020)
  • Duke University v. Biomarin Pharmaceutical, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1696 (Fed. Cir.) (Oct. 11, 2019) (on brief)
  • Daicel Corp. Celanese Int’l Corp., Appeal No. 18-2130 (Fed. Cir.) (Nov. 5, 2019) (on brief)
  • Daicel Corp. Celanese Int’l Corp., Appeal No. 18-2131 (Fed. Cir.) (Nov. 5, 2019) (argued) (on brief) (awaiting PTAB Decision)
  • Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd v. Infobridge PTE. Ltd., IPR2017-00099, IPR2017-00100 (on remand)
  • Ex Parte Bayer Cropscience NV and Biogen IDEC MA, Inc., Reexamination Control Nos. 90/013,394; 90/013,449; 90/013,452; 90/013,453; 90/013,515; 90/013,563 (PTAB) (Examiner’s rejections reversed on appeal, Sept. 30, 2020)
  • • Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd v. Ibex PT Holdings Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2019-2034, 2019-2098, 2019-2136 (Fed. Cir.) (for IPR2018-00012, IPR2018-00094, IPR2018-00095) (Motions to dismiss filed by Samsung on Nov. 12, 2020)

Speaking Engagements

    Current Speaking Engagements

  • Nov
    03

    20th FICPI Virtual Open Forum

    20th FICPI Virtual Open Forum

    Virtual
    Learn More

Articles

  • June 22, 2021

    Industry Reacts to the Supreme Court’s Arthrex Ruling: Chaos Averted – or Just Delayed?

    by | IPWatchdog

    Partner, Eugene T. Perez was recently quoted in an article by IPWatchdog regarding this week's U.S. Supreme Court patent decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. Et Al.

  • November 22, 2020

    Printed publications: an evolving doctrine

    by Eugene T. Perez | Printed publications: an evolving doctrine

    While the PTAB’s decision in Hulu provides some guidance for post-grant proceedings, there is still no bright-line rule as to what constitutes a “printed publication”. Eugene Perez of Birch Stewart Kolasch Birch examines current case rulings.

Presentations