• |
  • |
© 2012 Dorsey & Whitney LLP

  • University of Minnesota Law School (J.D., 1993), magna cum laude, Order of the Coif
    Minnesota Law Review: Articles Editor, 1992-93;
    Staff Member, 1991-92
  • University of California, Los Angeles (1986), B.S., Biomaterials Engineering, Materials Science and
    Engineering; Alpha Chi Sigma

  • Honorable Pasco M. Bowman, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1993-1994)

  • United States Patent and Trademark Office
  • Kansas
  • Minnesota
  • United States Courts of Appeal for the Eighth, Tenth, and Federal Circuits
  • United States District Courts for the Districts of Minnesota and Kansas

Kenneth E. Levitt

Partner
Minneapolis
P: (612) 340-2755
F: (612) 340-8856
|

Ken is a partner in Dorsey's Intellectual Property Group and a registered patent attorney. For about four years, while a Dorsey partner, Ken functioned as general counsel for a small cap medical device company, until the company was acquired by a Fortune 500 company. In that role, in addition to providing substantive legal and business advice, Ken managed the company’s legal department and also handled a variety of IP, SOX, litigation management, HR, and other issues.

With a background grounded in business counseling, IP, and business litigation, Ken advises technology companies, particularly medical device and biotechnology companies, with emphasis in the following areas:

  • Strategies for technology and IP, including patents and trade secrets. Processes to identify and protect innovation. Advice on licensing, acquisition, portfolio development and management, product clearance, infringement analyses, and due diligence for purchases and sales.
  • Commercial contracts and technology agreements, including IP acquisition and licensing agreements, product development agreements, agreements with employees and consultants, and agreements to resolve disputes.
  • Development of sound, cost-effective strategies for commercial and IP litigation, particularly technology-related aspects of IP, unfair competition, noncompete, and trade secret litigation.

Representative Litigation

  • GenSci v. Osteotech (bone grafting materials):  Represented Osteotech. GenSci was forced to withdraw its patent infringement allegations against Osteotech with prejudice prior to trial.  Osteotech’s patent infringement allegations were tried to a jury in a six week trial in Los Angeles.  The jury rejected all of GenSci’s defenses of noninfringement, reverse doctrine of equivalents, enablement, written description, anticipation, and obviousness, and awarded Osteotech damages of $17.5 million.  The verdict was listed as one of the 10 largest IP jury verdicts of 2001 by IP Worldwide, and also was the subject of an article in the January 21, 2002, edition of the National Law Journal.
  • DeKalb Genetics v. Novartis et al. (genetically engineered seed corn):  Represented defendant Novartis.  A week-long Markman hearing resulted in a favorable claim construction ruling on key noninfringement issues, and the case subsequently settled on favorable terms.
  • Kimberly-Clark, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Company (disposable diaper manufacturing):  Represented P&G in a private arbitration relating to technology for manufacturing disposable diapers.
  • Cobe Laboratories v. Avecor Cardiovascular (blood oxygenators):  Represented defendant Avecor.  Case settled on favorable terms after noninfringement and invalidity summary judgment motions filed on behalf of Avecor.

Presentations

  • “The America Invents Act,” Presented at Minnesota State Bar Association, September 2011
  • “The Scope of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1)’s Exemption: When Is Infringement of a Medical Device Patent Not Infringement?,” Presented at Minnesota State Bar Association, May 2004
  • “Preparing for Patent Litigation,” Presented at Schwegman, Lundberg, Woessner & Kluth, May 2004
  • “Planning Is Everything: What To Do Before the Patent Lawsuit Is Served,” Presented at Corporate Counsel Symposium, November 2003

Attorney Articles

September 14, 2011
Patent Reform Becomes Law: The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act
Volume 3 | No. 4
An Effective Patent Strategy: What It Is, and How To Implement It
1st ed. 2003
"Turning Patent Claims into Litigation English: An Update on Claim Construction Principles," The IP Book at 197
March 2003
An Effective Patent Strategy: What It Is and How to Implement It