Lisa Adelson is a counsel with the Intellectual Property Group at Praxis Precision Medicines. Lisa is a seasoned patent practitioner with numerous years of experience representing biotechnology, pharmaceutical, and design clients in all aspects of patent prosecution and counseling.
Lisa has extensive experience managing patent portfolios and conducting analyses related to major due diligence and patent litigation matters. Lisa has represented clients before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (formerly the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Before joining Praxis, Lisa spent many years as a patent attorney at a leading AmLaw 100 firm in Washington, D.C. In that role, Lisa assisted in a wide array of biotechnology and pharmaceutical clients with their patent-related needs, including preparation, prosecution, counseling, litigation, due diligence, and related regulatory work. Lisa also has significant experience in the field of design patent law, having practiced alongside one of the pioneers in this field at a Washington-area boutique.
Lisa earned her J.D. from Georgetown University Law School and her B.A., magna cum laude, from Colgate University, where she was a Colgate University Alumni Memorial Scholar, a Dana Scholar, and a lifetime member and president of Phi Eta Sigma Honor Society. She also received the Dean’s Award for Academic Excellence. Additionally, Lisa has received the Bausch and Lomb Science Prize, American Chemical Society Award, and Harvard Book Award.
Lisa is a strategic thinker who has represented individual and multinational clients at all phases of development. She is a frequent lecturer on current topics in intellectual property law and has published various articles in the field of patent law.
Last week, the Federal Circuit Court reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision in In re Surgisil, L.L.P., overturning the Board’s ruling that a design for a rolled-paper art tool for blending anticipated Surgisil’s (Applicant) claimed lip implant. In re Surgisil, L.L.P., No. 2020-1940, 2021 WL 4515275 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 4, 2021). Although the “stump” art tool cited as prior art in Surgisil resembled Applicant’s lip implant (see below), the Federal Circuit found that Applicant’s “claim is limited to lip implants and does not cover other articles of manufacture.” From this finding, the Surgisil court appears to extrapolate a symmetry by which a design for an artist’s stump is both ineligible for citation against Applicant’s lip implant in patent prosecution and also not covered in a putative enforcement of Applicant’s design.