Fish & Richardson Grows Profits, Revenue Amid Patent Litigation Headwinds
The firm saw modest revenue growth and a 7.2 percent rise in profits per equity partner in 2018.
March 06, 2019 at 04:28 PM
4 minute read
Despite a declining volume of new patent litigation in the U.S., intellectual property powerhouse Fish & Richardson managed to increase gross revenue in 2018 to nearly $431 million, while profits per equity partner grew by more than 7.2 percent to just under $1.75 million.
Fish posted a 3.4 percent growth in top-line revenue in 2018, bringing its total to $430,86 million, up from $416.78 million in 2017, according to ALM data.
Revenue per lawyer reached $1.21 million, up 1.3 percent from 2017, amid a 2 percent increase in head count to 356 lawyers.
Fish's partnership grew 3.9 percent, with 105 equity partners in 2018. Those partners shared a larger profits pie, with net income up 11.4 percent in 2018 to $183.67 million. The firm also added three nonequity partners, bringing that roster up to 66 partners.
Fish President and CEO Peter Devlin said the firm's financial results continue a streak of record figures over the past few years, even as the number of newly filed patent lawsuits has dropped over the same period.
Devlin said the firm has maintained active IP practices that go beyond traditional patent litigation, citing Patent and Appeal Board post-grant review cases and transactional work in which the firm advises startups and other companies on developing and protecting their IP portfolios.
With respect to the PTAB work, Devlin said that Fish is closing in on its 1,000th appearance in front of the board, which was created as part of a set of patent reforms in the 2011 America Invents Act.
Devlin also credited Fish's keen focus on reining in expenses. The firm typically seeks to keep any year-over-year growth in expenses to about 2 percent, he said.
“Our business has really been on the upswing. It's driven by revenue and very disciplined management of our expenses,” Devlin said. “Although IP litigation has been trending down, year-over-year, our business has been growing, and I think that's a direct reflection of our strength and brand.”
Devlin noted that the firm's life sciences work, both in litigation and transactions, was particularly busy throughout the year. The firm's founding office in Boston is still its largest, said Devlin, pointing out that the city has become a hotbed for life sciences and biotechnology companies.
The firm's transactional work often involves helping startups and other clients develop and manage their portfolio of patents and other IP. Devlin said Fish has been advising cancer therapy developer Loxo Oncology Inc. in connection with its worldwide patent strategy for several years, work that helped prepare the company for an early 2019 acquisition by Eli Lilly & Co. valued at about $8 billion. Fish also advises San Diego-based Samumed, which has made waves in the life sciences sector for its work on potential anti-aging therapies.
On the litigation side, the firm secured a number of positive results for clients in 2018. Among those was a successful defense of Gilead Sciences Inc. in a patent infringement action brought by Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC related to hepatitis C drugs. After Idenix secured a $2.5 billion verdict from a jury that found Gilead liable for willful patent infringement, Fish convinced a federal district judge to declare Idenix's patent invalid, effectively wiping out the damages award.
Separately, Fish guided Gilead to a win against Merck & Co. Inc. following another adverse jury verdict. At a federal district court in 2016, Fish successfully vacated a $200 million verdict against Gilead. The firm followed that with an affirmance at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which in July awarded Gilead $14 million in attorney fees.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute readArnold & Porter Matches Market Year-End Bonus, Requires Billable Threshold for Special Bonuses
3 minute readGrabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
Trending Stories
- 1Commentary: Freedom's Just Another Word
- 2Former McCarter & English Associate Fired Over 'Gangsta Rap' LinkedIn Post Sues Over Discrimination, Retaliation
- 3First-of-Its-Kind Parkinson’s Patch at Center of Fight Over FDA Approval of Generic Version
- 4The end of the 'Rust' criminal case against Alec Baldwin may unlock a civil lawsuit
- 5Solana Labs Co-Founder Allegedly Pocketed Ex-Wife’s ‘Millions of Dollars’ of Crypto Gains
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250