Print Page | Contact Us | Sign In | Register
Natasha Daughtrey
Last updated: 4/17/2018
Natasha Daughtrey
Membership Type: Active (attorney for 6+ years)
601 S. Figueroa St
Los Angeles
California
90017  United States
 [ Map ]
213 4262642 (Phone)
Professional Information
Goodwin Procter LLP
associate
601 S. Figueroa St.
Los Angeles
California
90017  United States
 [ Map ]
213 4262642 (Phone)
Visit Website »
  University of San Diego School of Law
  2010
Additional Information
  4/5/2018
  Intellectual Property
Education/Experience
J.D. University of San Diego (2010)
B.S. in Biology and Political Science, Arizona State University (2007)
Social/Volunteer Organizations
La Canada Flintridge Women's Golf Association
More Information
Ms. Daughtrey focuses her practice on intellectual property litigation and counseling, with a focus in the pharmaceutical space including biologics and biosimilars. Ms. Daughtrey has experience representing companies in all stages of patent litigation from pre- suit investigation through trial and appeal. She also advises clients on patent-related due diligence. Ms. Daughtrey is also a contributing editor on Goodwin Procter's Big Molecule Watch (https://www.bigmoleculewatch.com/).

Representative matters include:

•Genzyme Corporation, et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al., No. 1:13-cv-01506 (D. Del.): Representing Teva in an ongoing patent infringement litigation filed by Genzyme under the Hatch-Waxman Act in response to Teva’s filing of an abbreviated new drug application seeking approval to market a generic version of Genzyme’s stem cell mobilizing agent, Mozobil® (plerixafor).

•Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., et al., v, Lupin Ltd., et al., No. 1:14-cv-6893 (D.N.J.):Representing Lupin in an ongoing patent infringement litigation filed by Senju under the Hatch-Waxman Act in response to Lupin’s filing of an abbreviated new drug application seeking approval to market a generic version of Senju’s Prolensa® (bromfenac ophthalmic solution) medication.

•Prometheus Laboratories Inc. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc., et al., No. 2:11-cv-01241 (D.N.J.): Representing Roxane in a patent infringement litigation filed by Prometheus in response to Roxane’s filing of an abbreviated new drug application seeking approval to market a generic version of Prometheus’s IBS treatment drug, Lotronex® (alosetron hydrochloride). After a bench trial, the District Court found in favor of Roxane that Prometheus’s patent was invalid.