Michael J. Kane

I'll research this attorney's professional background before drafting.

Let me verify the Duane Morris connection and check for disambiguation and additional outcomes.

Let me disambiguate the Duane Morris entry and confirm the tracked case roles.

Michael J. Kane — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Specialty / focus areas. Kane's practice spans two distinct technology clusters. His firm profile and recognition emphasize life sciences and medical devices — Hatch-Waxman/ANDA litigation, biotechnology, pharmaceutical formulations, and post-grant strategy — alongside mechanical and manufacturing technology (he holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering). His tracked litigation docket, however, is predominantly software and consumer electronics: he has defended Google (Monticello Enterprises LLC v. Google LLC, asserted against online search/electronic commerce patents), Symantec (Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp.), and Fitbit (Blackbird Tech LLC v. Fitbit, Inc.). The combination suggests a litigator who is comfortable across electrical/software and life-sciences subject matter rather than a single-technology specialist.

Side preference. The tracked record is defense-leaning: five appearances for defendants against one for a plaintiff, with four of the six matters as lead or co-lead counsel. That posture is consistent with his broader practice — he regularly defends operating companies and brand pharmaceutical manufacturers in competitor, generic, and NPE/PAE disputes. His plaintiff-side work is at the patent-owner side of the "v." where the client holds the patents, including representing MIT and Repligen in their infringement action against ImClone (D. Mass.) and Halo Electronics at the Supreme Court. In short: primarily a defense-side litigator who also handles selective patent-owner prosecution of claims.

Firm context. Kane is a Principal in Fish & Richardson's Minneapolis office, where the bulk (five of six) of his tracked appearances sit. The remaining tracked entry lists Duane Morris as the firm, but I could not verify a patent litigator named Michael J. Kane at Duane Morris through public sources, so that attribution should be treated as unconfirmed; his documented career profile is Fish & Richardson, where he has practiced since at least the mid-2000s (he appears as Fish counsel in D. Mass. filings from 2005–2007). He is not an in-house attorney.

Notable cases and outcomes. His most prominent publicized matter is Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., where he worked on the Supreme Court win (2016) that loosened the Seagate test for enhanced patent damages — cited in his Minnesota Lawyer "Attorney of the Year" recognition. Other verified results include a $240 million jury verdict (affirmed on appeal) for a major pharmaceutical client concerning Coreg®; a $235 million damages award after a seven-day jury trial in a congestive-heart-failure method-of-treatment case; a defense jury verdict of non-infringement for Medtronic against C.R. Bard (arterial blood filters); and summary judgment of non-infringement for Medtronic against Haemonetics (affirmed by the Federal Circuit). In the tracked docket, the IV v. Symantec and Blackbird v. Fitbit matters were defense representations against asserted patent portfolios, and the Monticello v. Google case was a defense of Google. Outcomes for the three untitled tracked entries are not specified in the data and are not otherwise verifiable here.

PTAB / IPR experience. This is a substantial part of his practice. Fish's profile states he has appeared in 135+ petitions on behalf of both petitioners and patent owners in life-sciences and medical-device matters, and he was named Post-Grant Proceedings Attorney of the Year in the 2025 LMG Life Sciences Americas Awards. Reported work includes the Coherus BioSciences v. AbbVie IPRs invalidating Humira®-family patents (LMG Life Sciences "Impact Case of the Year," 2017), denial of all ten I-MAK IPR petitions against Gilead's sofosbuvir patents, denial of institution of four PGR petitions for a hybrid corn seed client, and serving as lead counsel in a Novartis v. Regents of the University of Michigan IPR (IPR2023-01346).

Bar / education. J.D. magna cum laude, University of Minnesota Law School (1994); B.S. with honors in mechanical engineering, Iowa State University; admitted in Minnesota (1994) and registered to practice before the USPTO (Reg. No. 39,722), with admissions before the Federal and Tenth Circuits and the U.S. Supreme Court per Martindale-Hubbell.

Note on disambiguation: the corporate and academic filings above consistently identify Michael J. Kane, USPTO Reg. No. 39,722, Fish & Richardson, Minneapolis. Other attorneys named Michael Kane (e.g., in other firms/practice areas) should not be conflated with this profile.