Taras A. Gracey

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

Let me verify his current firm, notable results, and PTAB work.

Taras A. Gracey — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas. Gracey is a Chicago-based IP trial lawyer whose practice runs in two channels: pharmaceutical/Hatch-Waxman ANDA litigation and hardware-side patent disputes involving chipsets, semiconductors, and display technologies. Firm and directory biographies describe him as trying both jury and bench cases and handling appeals in the Seventh and Federal Circuits, with litigation experience in California, Delaware, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and Texas. His tracked docket is consistent with the technology side of that description — the matters are display/backlight patent disputes against Innovative Display Technologies LLC and its affiliated NPE vehicles.

Side preference. The tracked record is entirely defense-side: 0 plaintiff-side appearances against 7 defendant-side appearances, most of them terminated or pro hac vice roles. He represented LG Display and LG Electronics against Innovative Display Technologies LLC and Delaware Display Group LLC, and appears in a related matter captioned K.J. Pretech Co., Ltd. v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC. That said, his published bio states he has represented both patent owners and accused infringers, and his most-cited courtroom result (below) was on the patent-owner side — so the defense-heavy tracker understates the breadth of his practice.

Firm context. Gracey's tracked appearances place him at Steptoe & Johnson (Chicago office), where he is identified in firm media coverage as a partner leading patent litigation teams; Martindale and Steptoe materials list him as a partner there. Earlier in his career he was at Winston & Stratern LLP (pro hac vice appearance in Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., D. Del. 2007) and later a shareholder at Polsinelli PC in Chicago (pro hac vice admission for Watson Laboratories in Jazz Pharmaceuticals v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, D.N.J. 2018). No in-house affiliation appears in the record.

Notable matters and outcomes. Verified: he led Steptoe's team for Sandoz in the consolidated Pulmicort Respules litigation, AstraZeneca LP v. Breath Ltd. (D.N.J.), where the court held the asserted patents invalid for obviousness and the Federal Circuit affirmed on May 7, 2015 (nonprecedential). Separately, he was part of the Winston & Strawn trial team, alongside McKool Smith, that obtained a $19 million willfulness verdict for Opti Inc. against Apple in the Eastern District of Texas (Opti Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 2:07-cv-00021); Apple dropped its appeal in December 2010. Bio-reported but not independently verified in the sources reviewed: a jury verdict of over $20 million for a patent owner and a $35 million settlement on the last day of trial in a technology case, and participation on the team that invalidated Eli Lilly's Prozac patent. Note that the Opti verdict and the pro hac vice orders confirm his involvement; the specific dollar figures in his firm bio should be treated as firm-reported unless corroborated.

PTAB/IPR. He co-authored Steptoe client publications on AIA post-grant proceedings (including an analysis of Coalition for Affordable Drugs IPRs against Celgene, Nov. 2015) and was a panelist on the firm's 2016 "PTAB: Five Years of IPRs" webinar, and his bio states he has handled IPRs. Nothing in the available record shows him as a frequent lead PTAB practitioner.

Bar and education. Admitted in Illinois (1995); B.A., University of California, Berkeley (1991); J.D., Duke University School of Law (1995). Directory listings also note admissions to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the Seventh and Federal Circuits, and the U.S. Supreme Court; this comes from a third-party directory rather than a primary source.

Caveat: several of the "notable result" figures above trace to the attorney's own firm biography. The case-tracking data and the reported court opinions corroborate his role in the Sandoz/AstraZeneca and Opti/Apple matters but not the unquantified verdict and settlement claims.