Krista Rycroft is a trial lawyer and patent litigator with more than 25 years of experience representing clients in high-stakes intellectual property and commercial disputes. With a background in both environmental and chemical engineering, she brings deep technical fluency to her practice, handling patent matters at the trial and appellate levels on behalf of both patentees and accused infringers and advising clients on licensing, due diligence, and patent validity and freedom-to-operate issues. Her experience spans a wide range of technologies, including pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices, telecommunications, semiconductors, and mechanical devices.

Krista has substantial jury and bench trial experience in federal courts nationwide, including Hatch-Waxman/ANDA litigation, biologics disputes, and patent cases involving wireless communications, semiconductor, and medical device technologies. Her practice encompasses all phases of litigation, from discovery and expert proceedings through trial, post-trial briefing, damages issues, inequitable conduct defenses, and royalty disputes.

Before joining the firm, Krista was Of Counsel at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP for 15 years. Earlier in her career, she practiced at Kaye Scholer LLP and Fish & Neave LLP. She also served as Co-Chair of the New York Intellectual Property Law Association's Women in IP Law Committee from 2014 to 2016.

Representative Trial Matters

• Represented a pharmaceutical company in litigation over extended-release oxybate formulations and methods of treatment, against a competing manufacturer (D. Del.); jury verdict for the client. Led all aspects of the damages case through expert proceedings and post-trial ongoing-royalty briefing.

• Represented global drug manufacturers in ANDA litigation over a branded extended-release medication, against a generic manufacturer (D. Del.); bench trial resolved by favorable post-trial settlement.

• Represented a global semiconductor company in litigation over coding in cellular processors (N.D. Cal.); won transfer of venue and summary judgment limiting damages, obtained a jury verdict cutting damages to a fraction of the amount sought, and reversed the infringement finding on JMOL.

• Represented surgical instrument manufacturers in a jury trial over trocar medical devices, against a competing manufacturer (E.D. Tex.); handled the inequitable-conduct case and post-trial briefing.

• Represented a biologics manufacturer in jury and bench trials over recombinant erythropoietin, brought by a biotechnology company (D. Mass.), including proceedings on remand; managed the inequitable-conduct defense and Section 112 written-description issues through trial and post-trial briefing.

• Represented a drug manufacturer in ANDA litigation over a branded anti-inflammatory medication (D.N.J.); judgment for the client holding three patents valid and enforceable.

• Represented barcode-scanning and machine-vision companies in litigation over scanning technology (D. Nev.); judgment holding all 14 patents unenforceable for prosecution laches, invalid, and not infringed.

• Represented consumer battery manufacturers in litigation over hearing aid batteries (W.D. Wis.); jury verdict and judgment holding all three patents-in-suit invalid.

Representative Litigation Matters

• Represented branded pharmaceutical companies in ANDA litigation over compound claims, compositions, and methods of making and using a GI drug, against a group of generic manufacturers (D. Del.); fact, venue, and expert discovery and pre-trial submissions; settled favorably on the eve of trial.

• Represented a cable services provider in litigation over methods of allocating internet traffic, brought by a patent-holding entity (E.D. Tex.); obtained dismissal on collateral-estoppel grounds following fact and expert discovery and Daubert motions.

• Represented a research university in litigation over coding, against a satellite communications company (C.D. Cal.); handled damages expert reports and depositions and oppositions to summary judgment.

• Represented a semiconductor manufacturer as intervenor in litigation over Ethernet-related patents, brought by a patent-holding entity against several electronics manufacturers (N.D. Cal.); handled patent-damages expert proceedings and a summary judgment motion of non-infringement and invalidity.

• Represented a medical device manufacturer in litigation over trocar medical devices, brought by a competing manufacturer (C.D. Cal.); obtained summary judgment of non-infringement.

Publications & Presentations

• “The Markman Process,” CLE Presentation: Practicing Law Institute, 2014-2026

• Pharmaceutical and Biotech Patent Law, Chapter 5:5, Enablement (Practicing Law Institute, 2008-2024 eds.)

• “Phillips v. AWH Corp.: Bringing Consistency to Claim Interpretation,” CLE Presentation: Wyeth, September 20, 2005

• “Federal Circuit Sets Forth Claim Construction Guidelines In An Effort To Bring Predictability To Claim Interpretation,” Kaye Scholer Patent Law Newsletter, July 2005

• “Is Grain Processing ‘Important’?,” Law Seminars International, Calculating & Proving Patent Damages, May 14, 2004

• “Is Uniformity In Patent Law Still Achievable?,” The New York Law Journal, May 12, 2003

• “The Effects Of Statements In Foreign Prosecution On U.S. Patents In Litigation,” New York Intellectual Property Law Association Joint Patent Seminar, New York, May 2, 2002

• “Jury’s Role Shrinks In Patent Litigation,” The National Law Journal, January 21, 2002