Partner
Jeffrey Smyth focuses on intellectual property litigation across a diverse range of fields, with a particular emphasis on cases involving pharmaceutical and life sciences technologies. He employs a meticulous and innovative approach to resolving disputes before U.S. district courts, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and arbitration tribunals, often when clients’ most important assets are at stake.
Jeffrey handles complex disputes involving patents and trade secrets in various technological domains. While he frequently leverages his expertise in cell biology and biochemistry for matters within the life sciences, he has also litigated cases concerning electrical and mechanical inventions. His recent engagements include work on technologies related to gene therapies and enzyme replacement therapies aimed at treating rare genetic disorders.
Jeffrey is proficient in all facets of U.S. district court litigation, including conducting jury trials and appeals before the Federal Circuit. Additionally, he has litigated patent validity issues before the PTAB, participated in arbitration proceedings under the American Arbitration Association (AAA), and has devoted time to various pro bono initiatives.
Prior to his legal career, Jeffrey worked in the laboratory at Dynavax Technologies, Inc., conducting early-stage vaccine research and development projects. His work involved ELISA antibody assay development, vaccine formulation testing, and protein production in E. coli. During his undergraduate studies, Jeffrey worked in an academic laboratory searching for genetic mutations in the Arabidopsis Thaliana plant model using PCR and DNA sequencing techniques.
Genzyme Corporation et al. v. Novartis Gene Therapies, Inc. et al.
Defended Novartis against Genzyme’s multiple patent infringement actions and inter partes review (IPR) proceedings related to recombinant adeno-associated virus vector technology used in Novartis’ blockbuster, breakthrough gene therapy Zolgensma®. The case settled after four patents were invalidated during claim construction, five patents found not literally infringed, and institution of multiple IPRs.
1:21-cv-01736, 1:23-cv-00554, D. Del., Judge Andrews
Finnegan represented Emergy, Inc., d/b/a Meati Foods in a trade secret misappropriation, breach of contract, and correction of inventorship case against The Better Meat Company (BMC) and Augustus Pattillo involving alternative meat made from mycelium.
Emergy alleged that Augustus Pattillo stole its trade secrets on the cultivation and production of mycelium that he learned while working as a lab technician for Emergy’s founders, misused them in his work with BMC, breached his nondisclosure agreement with Emergy, and improperly filed patent applications on Emergy’s technology and assigned them to BMC.
BMC filed claims of tortious interference and unfair competition against Emergy, which Emergy succeeded in striking under California’s anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) statute. After prevailing under the anti-SLAPP statute, Emergy was statutorily entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs for defending against BMC’s stricken claims of tortious interference and unfair competition
Early in the litigation, Emergy defeated BMC’s motion to dismiss Emergy’s trade secret misappropriation and breach of implied contract claims. Emergy later defeated BMC’s motion for summary judgment on Emergy’s trade secret misappropriation, breach of contract, and breach of implied contract claims. The case settled soon after the Court issued its summary judgment ruling.
2-21-cv-02338, E.D. Cal., Judge Mueller
2-21-cv-02417, E.D. Cal., Judge Mueller
01-19-0001-6937; 01-20-0000-5081, AAA
Asetek Danmark A/S v. CMI USA, Inc.
3:13-cv-00457, N.D. Cal., Judges Chen, Corley, Tigar
Conference
ACC SFBA Life Sciences Conference 2026 ACC SFBA Life Sciences Conference 2026
March 10-12, 2026
Virtual
Webinar
Patent Eligibility and Engineered Natural Products: Overcoming 101 Challenges, Leveraging Options for IP Protection Patent Eligibility and Engineered Natural Products: Overcoming 101 Challenges, Leveraging Options for IP Protection
April 17, 2025
Webinar
Conference
IP Leadership Executive Summit 2025 IP Leadership Executive Summit 2025
April 15-16, 2025
San Jose
Conference
California Lawyers Association 48th IP Institute California Lawyers Association 48th IP Institute
March 6-8, 2025
Long Beach
Virtual Seminar
2025 ACC SFBA Life Sciences Conference 2025 ACC SFBA Life Sciences Conference
March 4-6, 2025
Virtual
Award/Ranking
61 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2025 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 61 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2025 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll
May 7, 2026
Award/Ranking
56 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2024 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 56 Finnegan Attorneys Recognized on the 2024 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll
April 24, 2025
DC BarMedia Mention
Sanofi Unit To Pay $180M in Disease Treatment Patent Fight Sanofi Unit To Pay $180M in Disease Treatment Patent Fight
November 22, 2021
Law360Press Release
Finnegan Announces Seven New Partners Finnegan Announces Seven New Partners
January 1, 2020
Media Mention
Fed. Circ. Agrees Prenatal DNA Test Patent Doesn't Hold Up Fed. Circ. Agrees Prenatal DNA Test Patent Doesn't Hold Up
July 10, 2019
Law360Media Mention
Judge Says CMI Can't Invalidate Asetek Cooling Patents Judge Says CMI Can't Invalidate Asetek Cooling Patents
April 22, 2015
Law360Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.