Marco J. Quina

Partner - Boston

Bio photo for Marco Quina
Download Media Photo

Contact Information

617.832.3093

617.832.7000

mquina@foleyhoag.com Download vCard

Marco Quina represents clients in commercial litigation with a focus on licensing, patent, inventorship, technology transfer, and trade secret disputes. His practice has involved a range of technology, including biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and medical equipment. Marco has extensive experience in cases involving disputes between licensors and licensees, between parties to collaboration or co-development agreements, and among co-owners of patents and patent applications. He is also knowledgeable about managing and trying cases involving complex electronic discovery. He has litigated cases in both federal and state courts as well as the International Trade Commission.

More »

Education:

  • Boston College Law School, J.D., magna cum laude, Order of the Coif, 2004
  • Bowdoin College, B.A., summa cum laude, 2001

Representative Experience

Intellectual Property, Licensing, and Ownership

  • Represented the University of Massachusetts Biologic Laboratories in a dispute with MedImmune over royalty obligations under a technology license agreement covering MedImmune's Synagis® drug. Obtained judgment after trial, affirmed on appeal, requiring MedImmune to continue paying royalties.
  • Represented GI Dynamics in patent ownership and inventorship litigation brought by W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., who asserted ownership of a patent portfolio covering a medical device for placement in a patient’s intestinal tract. Gore dropped its claims shortly before trial, preserving GI Dynamics’ exclusive ownership of the patent portfolio.
  • Counsel for a university in a dispute with licensee and in subsequent successful license negotiations involving patents related to the diagnosis and analysis of cells and tissue samples.
  • Defended Biogen in a litigation brought by Knopp Neurosciences concerning ownership of patient biosamples obtained by Biogen in a phase 3 clinical trial investigating dexpramipexole for the treatment of ALS. Obtained dismissal with prejudice of Knopp’s claim just before trial.
  • Co-author of numerous amicus briefs on behalf of clients and professional and trade organizations in cases involving biotechnology patent or licensing issues, including Supreme Court amicus briefs in Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc. (post-expiration royalties), AMP v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (patent eligibility), and Octane Fitness v. Icon Health & Fitness (fee shifting), and a Federal Circuit en banc amicus brief in Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (divided infringement).
  • Represented Biogen in defending a patent dispute with Sanofi-Aventis involving patents directed to viral DNA regulatory sequences. Obtained mandamus from the Federal Circuit transferring the case from the Eastern District of Texas to the Northern District of California. In re Genentech, Inc. and Biogen Idec Inc., 566 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The district court subsequently granted summary judgment of noninfringement, which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Genentech, Inc. and Biogen Idec Inc., 473 Fed. Appx. 885 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
  • Represented the University of Massachusetts in a correction of inventorship and contract action brought by the Max Planck Institute and Alnylam Pharmaceuticals against UMass and two other co-owners of patent applications directed to therapeutic uses of RNA interference. Obtained summary judgment or dismissal of all damages claims against UMass. The district court held, in a matter of first impression, that Chapter 93A could not be asserted against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. See Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Zur Forderung Der Wissenschaften E.V., et al. v. Whitehead Institute, MIT, and the University of Massachusetts, 850 F.Supp. 2d 317 (D. Mass. 2011). The case subsequently settled.
  • Represented Global Bio-Chem Technology Group, a Chinese lysine producer, in defending a Section 337 investigation before the International Trade Commission involving patents claiming genetically engineered bacteria. After a bench trial, the ITC found that the asserted claims were invalid and that the patentee had committed inequitable conduct. The Federal Circuit affirmed. Ajinomoto Co., Inc. v. Int’l. Trade Comm’n, 597 F.3d 1267 (2010).
  • Obtained a defense judgment, subsequently affirmed on appeal, on behalf of a client accused of fraud and breach of contract relating to a transaction involving genetic sequence information. The contract claims were disposed of on summary judgment, and fraud claims resulted in a judgment for the defendant after a bench trial.
  • Represented CytoLogix Corp. in a patent infringement and antitrust suit brought against Ventana Medical Systems, a manufacturer of automated histology equipment. The judgment obtained after jury trial was the fifth highest jury verdict in Massachusetts in 2007.

Pro Bono

  • Co-counsel, with GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) and Justice in Aging, in a class action suit challenging the Social Security Administration’s attempts to recoup benefits from Supplemental Security Income recipients married to a person of the same sex who were overpaid as a result of SSA’s failure to timely recognize their marriages after the Defense of Marriage Act was ruled unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor. SSA subsequently changed its policies.
  • Filed an amicus brief on behalf of GLAD, the Human Rights Campaign, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and numerous other civil rights organizations in V.L. v. E.L., urging the Supreme Court to grant certiorari and reverse the Alabama Supreme Court’s refusal to grant full faith and credit to a Georgia adoption judgment obtained by two lesbian partners. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the Alabama court by summary disposition.
  • Co-counsel, with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, on an amicus brief in Partanen v. Gallagher filed by a nationwide group of parentage and family law scholars urging the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to apply the protections of the Massachusetts artificial reproduction and paternity statutes to unmarried lesbian parents.
  • Co-authored an amicus brief to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Commonwealth v. Walters on behalf of several Massachusetts domestic and sexual violence prevention non-profit organizations arguing that a Facebook post may in some circumstances qualify as a true threat under the Commonwealth’s stalking statute.
  • Submitted an amicus brief to the United States Supreme Court in McCullen v. Coakley on behalf of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts and the Planned Parenthood Federation of America defending the constitutionality of Massachusetts’ health care facility buffer zone law.
  • Obtained immigration relief for numerous undocumented victims of domestic violence including U nonimmigrant status, permanent residency, and citizenship. 
  • Represented many victims of domestic violence in obtaining protective orders from their abusers.

Foley Hoag Alerts & Updates

Honors

  • Named as a “Rising Star” in Intellectual Property Litigation, Super Lawyers’ Massachusetts Rising Stars: A Comprehensive Listing of the Best Young Lawyers in Massachusetts (2008-2012)
  • BOSTON COLLEGE LAW REVIEW, Articles Editor

Involvement

  • American Intellectual Property Law Association, Member
  • Boston Patent Law Association, Member
  • American Bar Association, Member
  • Boston Bar Association, Member
  • Interviewed, “Federal bar adapting to ‘seismic’ rule changes,” Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (January 2016)
  • Interviewed, “How Not to Get Snared in Brulotte’s Web”, JurisDiction International Intellectual Property Law Podcast (July 2015), available at http://www.iplawpodcast.com/2015/07/29/july-2015-episode-39/
  • Panelist, “The Economics of Aging in the LGBTQ Community,” Harvard Law School Lambda Legal Advocacy Conference: LGBTQ Advocacy in Impoverished Communities (November 2015).
Add to Bio Folder

Download Bio

Bar Admissions

  • Massachusetts

Court Admissions

  • U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. Court of Appeals Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Supreme Court