Deborah H. Yellin
Overview
Deborah H. Yellin is a partner in Crowell & Moring's Washington, D.C. office. She focuses her practice on U.S. Patent and Trademark Office post-grant proceedings, intellectual property portfolio management, patent procurement, counseling and district court litigation.
Career & Education
- Tufts University, B.S., magna cum laude, 1996
- The George Washington University Law School, J.D., 2000
- The George Washington University School of Medicine, M.P.H., 2000
- District of Columbia
- Virginia
- U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
- Supreme Court of the United States
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Professional Activities and Memberships
- Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Bar Association
- American Intellectual Property Law Association
- American Chemical Society
- Virginia Bar Association
- Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Bar Association
- Japanese
Deborah's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.01.25
Hatch-Waxman PTE for Reissue Patents Should Be Calculated From the Original Patent’s Issue Date
On March 13, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision about Patent Term Extensions (PTEs) under the Hatch-Waxman Act for reissue patents. In Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. (No. 2023-2254), the Court confirmed that the PTE provision under 35 U.S.C. § 156 refers to the original patent’s issue date, not the reissue patent’s issue date. Thus, the issue date of the original patent should be used when calculating the extension period.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.24.25
USPTO Finds Claims of Two of Moderna’s mRNA Patents Unpatentable: What’s Next in the Vaccine Wars?
Firm News | 1 min read | 11.08.24
Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.23.24
Unfinished Business in Congress on Drug Patents and Competition
Representative Matters
- Apotex, Inc., et al. v. Amgen, Inc. Representing petitioner Apotex in inter partes review before the PTAB related to anti-cancer drugs, securing victory for Apotex at the PTAB.
- Apotex, Inc., et al. v. Novartis AG, et al. Representing petitioner Apotex in inter partes review before the PTAB related to a multiple sclerosis drug, securing victory for Apotex at the PTAB and in the resulting appeal at the Federal Circuit.
- Moderna v. CureVac, representing patent owner CureVac in inter partes review before the PTAB relating to purification of RNA.
- LifeNet Health v. Life Cell Corp., No. 2:13-cv-00486 (E.D. Virginia): Represented plaintiff LifeNet in patent-infringement action involving soft-tissue grafts. Jury awarded LifeNet over $34 million; decision affirmed on appeal.
- Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. et al. v. Handa Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., No. 3:11-840 (N.D. Cal.), and Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. and Handa Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. et al., No. 5:13-1927 (N.D. Cal.). Represented Handa and Par in patent infringement cases concerning Par's ANDA for a generic version of Dexilant® (dexlansoprazole).
- E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company v. Kolon Industries, Inc., et al., No. 3:09-cv-58 (E.D. Virginia). Represented plaintiff DuPont in case alleging misappropriation of over 100 trade secrets relating to KEVLAR® fiber technology in one of the largest trade secret misappropriation cases in the United States. Obtained a $919 million verdict against Kolon for the theft of KEVLAR® technology after a seven-week jury trial held in Richmond, Virginia.
Deborah's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.01.25
Hatch-Waxman PTE for Reissue Patents Should Be Calculated From the Original Patent’s Issue Date
On March 13, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision about Patent Term Extensions (PTEs) under the Hatch-Waxman Act for reissue patents. In Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. (No. 2023-2254), the Court confirmed that the PTE provision under 35 U.S.C. § 156 refers to the original patent’s issue date, not the reissue patent’s issue date. Thus, the issue date of the original patent should be used when calculating the extension period.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.24.25
USPTO Finds Claims of Two of Moderna’s mRNA Patents Unpatentable: What’s Next in the Vaccine Wars?
Firm News | 1 min read | 11.08.24
Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.23.24
Unfinished Business in Congress on Drug Patents and Competition
Insights
Intellectual Property – 3-D Printing: Manufacturing, Disrupted
|02.27.19
Crowell & Moring's Regulatory Forecast 2019
- |
09.18.15
Bloomberg BNA Pharmaceutical Law & Industry Report
Practices
Deborah's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.01.25
Hatch-Waxman PTE for Reissue Patents Should Be Calculated From the Original Patent’s Issue Date
On March 13, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision about Patent Term Extensions (PTEs) under the Hatch-Waxman Act for reissue patents. In Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. (No. 2023-2254), the Court confirmed that the PTE provision under 35 U.S.C. § 156 refers to the original patent’s issue date, not the reissue patent’s issue date. Thus, the issue date of the original patent should be used when calculating the extension period.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.24.25
USPTO Finds Claims of Two of Moderna’s mRNA Patents Unpatentable: What’s Next in the Vaccine Wars?
Firm News | 1 min read | 11.08.24
Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.23.24
Unfinished Business in Congress on Drug Patents and Competition