Rachael Bacha is an experienced trial lawyer who has practiced in the firm’s intellectual property litigation group since 2010. With experience in federal district and appellate courts and the ITC, Rachael has worked with a wide variety of clients in varying technologies, including biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, consumer electronics, semiconductors, and computer software sciences.
Rachael has significant experience at all stages of both arbitration and litigation, from pre-suit investigation and risk assessment, through trial and appeal, including managing discovery, crafting winning briefs and motions, taking and defending fact and expert depositions, and presenting and cross-examining witnesses at trial. Rachael specializes in the damages aspects of litigation and has assisted with damages assessments at district court in patent, copyright, and trade secret matters, as well as domestic industry at the ITC.
During her time at the firm, Rachael has had the opportunity to extern with Mobilization for Justice (formerly MFY Legal Services) in their housing unit, and with the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office, where she served as lead counsel on several criminal trials. Before joining Ropes & Gray, Rachael worked as a researcher for the E.J. Hubbard Lab at the Skirball Institute for Biomolecular Medicine, and also took a fellowship with the United Nations Development Programme’s Equator Initiative.
Experience
- Carbyne Biometrics v. A Major Multinational Consumer Electronics Company (W.D. Tex.): Defending a major multinational consumer electronics company in a six-patent suit concerning user authentication technologies.
- Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc. (N.D. Cal.): Representing patent owner in an eight-patent infringement suit concerning 3D NAND semiconductor technology.
- Aire Technologies v. A Major Multinational Consumer Electronics Company (W.D. Tex.): Defended a major multinational consumer electronics company in a three-patent suit concerning NFC and mobile payment technologies.
- Egenera v. Cisco Systems (D. Mass.): Represented Egenera in a three-patent infringement case in filed against Cisco involving processing area network technology.
- Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. Micron Technology, Inc. (W.D. Tex.): Represented IP Bridge in a four-patent suit relating to the fabrication and design of DRAM chips.
- Certain Networking Devices, Computers, and Components Thereof and Systems Containing the Same (337-TA-1298): Defended cloud storage provider NetApp against patent infringement claims brought by Proven Networks. Successfully obtained summary determination of no violation based on Proven’s waiver of its domestic industry theory through prior patent license agreement with RPX Corporation.
- Represented a medical device company in a case involving trade secret misappropriation and breach of contract involving technologies for flow cytometers.
- Represented a multinational pharmaceutical company in a group of lawsuits (N.D. Cal. and ITC) against competitors misleadingly marketing unapproved drug products as approved generic versions of client’s FDA-approved prescription drug.
- Certain L-Tryptophan, L-Tryptophan Products, and Their Methods of Production (337-TA-1005): Represented CJ CheilJedang adverse to its competitor Ajinomoto in a two-patent dispute relating to genetically-modified bacteria for the production of L-tryptophan.
- Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. v. River’s Edge Pharmaceuticals LLC, et al.: Represented plaintiffs in an ANDA litigation involving Bayer’s DESONATE® topical corticosteroid cream.
- Represented a major consumer electronics company in defense of litigation regarding computer operating systems.
- Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. A Major Japanese Consumer Electronics Company (D. Del.): Represented a major Japanese electronics manufacturer in a multi-patent infringement litigation involving semiconductors and various features of digital cameras. Obtained highly favorable settlement shortly after the Court issued its Markman order.
- NuVasive, Inc. v. Cadwell Labs.: Obtained favorable settlement on behalf of client in patent suit relating to intraoperative monitoring equipment.
- Shelbyzyme LLC v. Genzyme Corporation: Defended Genzyme's life-saving drug, Fabrazyme®, against charges of patent infringement. Obtained favorable settlement after a week-long jury trial and an order compelling Shelbyzyme to produce attorney-client privileged communications based on the crime fraud exception, and shortly before bench trial on Genzyme’s equitable defenses.
- Paltalk Holdings v. NCsoft Corporation, et al.: Obtained favorable settlement for defendant NCSoft Corporation in a patent infringement suit involving network communications software.
- Spark Networks v. Humor Rainbow: Represented plaintiff Spark Networks in a patent infringement suit involving technology related to online dating services.
- PerkinElmer, Inc. and NTD Laboratories v. Intema Limited: Represented PerkinElmer and NTD in patent infringement suit involving a method for screening for Down’s Synrome, resulting in invalidation of Intema’s patent.