Jeremy P. Oczek is a senior associate in the Proskauer’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution Department and a member of its Patent Law and Intellectual Property Practice Groups. He is resident in the Firm’s Boston office.

Jeremy’s practice focuses on advising clients on all aspects of intellectual property law. He is a skilled intellectual property litigator with extensive experience in all aspects of litigation, including case preparation and strategy, discovery, depositions, motion practice, Markman hearings, and trial. While Jeremy’s technical background is in biology, he has successfully handled many patent cases involving a broad range of technologies, including electrical, mechanical, semiconductor, nanotechnology, medical, and computer software fields. Jeremy is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and had significant experience in patent and trademark prosecution early in his career before focusing his practice on intellectual property litigation. In addition, he has counseled clients on evaluating and structuring transactions involving intellectual property.

Jeremy is admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts. He is admitted to the bars of Massachusetts and New York.

Jeremy received his law degree, magna cum laude, from Boston College Law School, where he served as Managing Editor of the Boston College Law Review. He received his Bachelor of Science in Biology from the State University of New York at Geneseo.

Representative litigation matters:

• Patent: MKS Instruments, Inc. v. Advanced Energy Corp. (D. Del.) - Was a significant member of the trial team representing MKS in its assertion of patents relating to plasma processing equipment for use in the semiconductor industry. After a four-day trial, the jury returned a verdict of infringement in favor of our client MKS on all asserted patents.

• Patent: PSN Illinois, Inc. v. Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc. (N.D. Ill.) - Represented Ivoclar, the world’s leading manufacturer of dental crowns and implants, in the defense of a patent case seeking tens of millions dollars in damages. We obtained summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Ivoclar, which was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

• Patent: Analog Devices, Inc. v. Silicon Laboratories, Inc. (D. Mass.) - Represented Analog Devices in its assertion of five patents relating to digital isolation technology. After the close of discovery, Analog Devices obtained summary judgment against Silicon Labs’ counterclaim of unfair competition (Mass. Chapter 93A). The matter settled on favorable terms to our client before trial.

• Patent: BIAX Corp. v. Analog Devices, Inc. (E.D. Tex.) - Represented Analog Devices in the defense of a five-patent litigation relating to parallel processing in computers. After jury selection, the plaintiff dropped its demand and agreed to settle the case against Analog for a token payment.

• Patent: ScanSoft, Inc. v. ART Advanced Recognition Technologies, Inc. (D. Mass.) - Defended ART in a patent infringement action relating to voice recognition technology. The case ended after ScanSoft acquired our client.

• Trademark: General Media Communications, Inc. v. Felt Enterprises, Inc. (D. Mass.)- Represented GMCI in its assertion of its PENTHOUSE® trademarks. After the complaint was filed, a consent judgment was entered.

• Trade Secret: Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary v. QLT, Inc. (D. Mass.) - At his prior firm, represented MEEI in a complex trade secret litigation relating to photodynamic therapeutic treatment for age-related macular degeneration.

• Defamation: Fanning v. Goodin (D. Mass.) - In a pro bono case, represented Daniel Goodin, a former reporter for the Industry Standard, in a defamation suit brought by John Fanning, uncle of Shawn Fanning, the founder of Napster. After our client won sanctions against the plaintiff from the district court, the case was dismissed by the plaintiff.

Jeremy has published the following articles on intellectual property law in the Boston College Law Review and the Sedona Conference Journal:

• "First Markman, Now Festo: A Simplified Approach To Patent Litigation Trials," Steven M. Bauer, Richard Myrus, Jeremy P. Oczek, 4 Sedona Conference Journal 73 (2003).

• "In the Aftermath of the 'Terminator' Technology Controversy: Intellectual Property Protections for Genetically Engineered Seeds and the Right to Save and Replant Seed," 41 Boston College Law Review 627 (2000). (Cited with approval in Monsanto Co. v. Byrd, 2000 WL 33952260 (E.D.N.C. 2000))

Jeremy has also presented as a panelist at Suffolk University Law School's Center for Legal Studies Annual IP Conference, entitled "Tips, Tactics and Strategies: Dealing with the Changing Landscape of Patent Law" (2008).