Senior Director and Patent Counsel – Other – Cheshire, Conn. (move to New Haven in 2015)

Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,  Alexion Pharmaceuticalsa biopharmaceutical company focused on serving patients with severe and ultra-rare disorders through the innovation, development and commercialization of life-transforming therapeutic products, is seeking a senior patent attorney to address a full scope of global biotechnology patent issues. The attorney in this position will work with clients across multiple functional areas to build, maintain, defend and enforce the company’s intellectual property interests. The work will include client counseling; patent preparation and prosecution; rendering legal opinions with respect to patentability, validity and freedom to operate; due diligence reviews; and intellectual property related transactional work.

Reports to: Vice President, Head of Intellectual Property
Location: Cheshire, CT (moving to New Haven, CT in 2015)

Principal Responsibilities:
• Provide clear, actionable and business-savvy intellectual property advice to clients within Research and Development, Technical Operations, Business Development and other functional areas through all phases of drug research, development and commercialization.
• Build the company’s intellectual property portfolio through strategic patent preparation and prosecution.
• Manage intellectual property risks within the company’s programs and pipeline, including performing freedom-to-operate analyses and rendering opinions with respect to patent infringement and validity.
• Conduct intellectual property due diligence on strategic transactions and perform intellectual property related transactional work.
• Support intellectual property litigation (offense and defense), partnering with outside counsel, other in-house counsel and clients to efficiently achieve successful outcomes.
• Educate clients on important intellectual property issues and forge strong client relationships that leverage opportunities to identify, create and protect valuable intellectual property.

Qualifications:
• At least 10 years of patent attorney experience with reputable, highly rated law firms and/or life sciences companies, preferably a combination of both.
• Excellent biotech patent preparation and prosecution skills, with significant experience in global patent prosecution.
• Registration to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
• Proven record of counseling clients in biologics research and development programs.
• Experience implementing lifecycle management strategies for biologic products.
• Comprehensive understanding of intellectual property case law, rules and regulations.
• Demonstrated ability to develop pragmatic, business-centric approaches for managing intellectual property risks.
• Competence to independently identify, analyze and render legal advice on complex intellectual property issues.
• A global business enterprise view, with recognition of the potential commercial implications of an intellectual property issue within a region or country.
• Clear potential to establish professional credibility with executive level clients by delivering clear, concise and accurate advice, including the appropriate level of detail and anticipation of follow-up questions.
• Passion and commitment to the practice of law.
• Proven record of high integrity.

Education:
• J.D. from a highly respected law school.
• Advanced degree, preferably Ph.D., in chemistry, biochemistry, molecular biology, biotechnology, pharmacology or another discipline relevant to biopharmaceutical drug research and development.

As a leading employer in our industry, Alexion is proud to offer a highly competitive package of base and incentive compensation as well as a comprehensive benefits program designed to support the health, wellness and financial security of our employees and their families. Benefits include group medical, vision and dental coverage, group and supplemental life insurance, 401(k) with company match, tuition reimbursement, relocation assistance and much more. To learn more about Alexion, please visit www.alexionpharma.com or download our App for iPhones and Blackberries.
Alexion is an Equal Opportunity /Affirmative action employer

Contact:
Apply online by emailing Karen Tuozzo at: tuozzok@alxn.com.

Additional Info:
Employer Type: Other
Job Location: Cheshire, Connecticut (move to New Haven in 2015)

Alexion is the global leader in complement inhibition, and has developed and markets Soliris® (eculizumab) as a treatment for patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) and atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS), two debilitating, ultra-rare and life-threatening disorders caused by chronic uncontrolled complement activation. Soliris is currently approved in more than 40 countries and is being developed for other potential indications. Alexion is also developing other highly innovative therapeutics for ultra-rare disorders, including Asfotase Alfa for pediatric-onset hypophosphatasia, (HPP) and ALXN 1101 for Molybdenum Cofactor Deficiency (MoCD), both of which have been granted breakthrough therapy designations from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Additional drug candidates in development include ALXN1102 and ALXN 1103, which are novel alternative pathway complement inhibitors, and ALXN 1107, a novel humanized antibody designed to target rare and severe inflammatory disorders. Further information about Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. can be found at: www.alexionpharma.com.

Hide comments

16 thoughts on “Senior Director and Patent Counsel – Other – Cheshire, Conn. (move to New Haven in 2015)”

  6. 11

    I think I said it before, but writing a book on statutory interpretation changed fundamentally how I look at the role of courts. “Activism” can come in many forms….

  7. 10

    “a lot of folks”

    Really Ned? ‘A lot of folks’ is simply not persuasive here.

    I see your bias to treating method claims as a second class patent eligible category sneaking back into the picture.

  8. 9

    I agree with you completely.

    A whole lot of nonsense attacking the patent system, when the plain words of the statute are not getting to the philosophical point desired.

  9. 8

    I know that is one opinion, that on 12(b)(6) you can decide such things based upon, I guess, what a judge thinks is “abstract.” But, where do you draw the line between “abstract” and “broad”? Is a “broad” claim “abstract,” too? Further, if this is 16 lines of code (which seems like proof) that sounds like it’s not abstract, unless all software is abstract? If a process can be boiled down to 16 steps, how is that abstract? Put the other way, if a 16 step process is abstract, aren’t all of them?

    Do you do like you did and analyze each element (unlike any other aspect of patent law I can think of this early).

    And, I thought “abstractness” had something to do with “preemption” of alternatives (which seems more like breadth than abstractness, but what do I know), and if alternatives matter, does a judge just make up her mind on what might be available, or do we use evidence? Or, if it’s “too abstract” does the fact that there are lots of non-infringing alternatives not matter?

    This is nonsense “analysis”, is I guess my point. It’s the pre-1952 “invention” stuff coming back to haunt us, despite what Congress tried to do.

  10. 7

    David, reading the claim, it is directed to a method, every element of which is abstract within to the extent that term is understood by reference to Bilksi or Benson.

    I think there are a lot of folks who believe such claims are invalid on their face. 12(b) is quite appropriate.

    As to Amicus Briefs and evidence, I don’t know whether the simplicity of coding the invention is even relevant to 101. It might be to obviousness.

  12. 5

    That’s not nearly as crazy as you might think Prof. Hricik.

    And “abstract” is not the only pitfall, for example: the aftermath of Nuitjen.

    In reality, Nuitjen is simply a bad decision from a reality based viewpoint. There are plenty of patents (otherwise perfectly valid), that can be easily argued to be INvalid based on the (poor) reasoning in Nuitjen.

    Semi-recent posts on the main Patently-O blog showed a retreat from the full reasoning of Nuitjen and a pure dependence on the “transience” prong of the argument. I have provided many (unrebutted) posts about how that “transience” prong is simply wrong.

    But…

    Nuitjen is controlling law.

  13. 4

    E.g., patent says “what we claim here, of course, is nothing but an abstract idea.” Seems to me that’d be an admission, and, so, evidence.

    Like I said, us law profs get paid to think of crazy stuff like that. BUt I agree with your point.

  14. 3

    I am still uncertain as to what you mean Prof. Hricik.

    As far as I know, attorney argument is not – and cannot take the place of – evidence. Even if that argument is merely trying to point to the face of the patent.

    Patents have a legal presumption of validity, and the patent itself, then – standing alone and on its own face – cannot be evidence of its own invalidity. An attorney’s argument that rests only on the patent – without other evidence MUST fail by law.

  15. 2

    If there is clear and convincing evidence on the face of the patent, it could be enough, in a 12(b)(6). But… I can make up something like that as a law professor, but can’t imagine it happening in the real world.

  16. 1

    Are you implying that mere argument alone cannot be clear and convincing evidence?

    I see nothing else in the brief.

Comments are closed.