skip to main content

ProfessionalsKripa Raman

Kripa Raman

Tel: +1-212-373-3295
Fax: +1-212-492-0295

New York

1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019-6064
Fax: +1-212-492-0295

Bar Admissions 
Bar Admissions 

As counsel in the Litigation Department, Kripa Raman focuses his practice on patent litigation matters. He also has experience in licensing and the intellectual property aspects of transactions.

Mr. Raman has a B.A. in Chemistry from Columbia University and a J.D. from Duke University where he was an editor of the Duke Environmental Law and Policy Forum.


Representative Cases:

  • Boston Scientific v. Edwards Lifesciences, No. 16-275 (D.Del.) (transcatheter heart valves)
  • Viva Healthcare Packaging v. CTL Packaging USA and Tuboplast Hispania, No. 13-CV-569 (W.D.N.C.) (injection molding of high melt flow polymers to manufacture squeezable tubes; case settled after client Viva prevailed on all summary judgment motions and obtained exclusion of expert opinions contrary to Court's claim construction rulings)
  • Edwards Lifesciences v. Medtronic, (D. Del., C.D.Cal.) (In series of litigations on behalf of client Edwards Lifesciences relating to transcatheter heart valve and cardiac pacing patents, obtained 2014 jury verdict of $393.6 million for willful infringement and 2010 jury verdict of $74 million for willful infringement.  The Medtronic matters ultimately settled with Medtronic paying Edwards over $1 billion)
  • BASF Agro B.V. and Bayer S.A.S. v. Makhteshim Agan of North America and Control Solutions, Inc., Nos. 10-CV-276, 13-CV-422 (M.D.N.C.) (heterocyclic chemical compounds used as pesticides; client BASF obtained a consent judgment broadly prohibiting infringement and a subsequent contempt order for Defendants' violation of the consent judgment)
  • BASF Agro B.V. and Bayer S.A.S. v. Cheminova, Inc., No. 10-CV-274 (M.D.N.C.) (heterocyclic chemical compounds used as pesticides; client BASF obtained stipulated injunction following Markman ruling)
  • In the Matter of Certain Short Wavelength Semiconductor Lasers and Products Containing Same, Investigation No. 337-TA-627 (ITC) (semiconductor blue lasers)
  • Polymer Solvents v. PPG and BASF, No. 2:07-CV-049 (E.D.Tex.) (low VOC polymers)
  • BASF Catalysts v. Honeywell Int'l et al., No. MRS-C-36-07 (N.J. Supr. Ct., Ch. Div) (trade secrets relating to catalysts and absorbents; client BASF obtained preliminary injunction and stipulated final injunction)
  • Collins v. Gillette, No. 2:04-CV-0038 (E.D.Tex.) (diamond-like carbon coating of razor blades)
  • L'Oreal v. Estée Lauder, No. 04-1660 (D.N.J.) (polyamide based mascara formulations; case settled after client Estée Lauder obtained Markman ruling precluding infringement of claims specifically drafted to cover its accused products)
  • Chevron Phillips Chemicals v. BASF, No. H-04-1693 (S.D.Tex.) (block copolymers)
  • Purdue Pharma v. Roxane and Endo, Nos. 99-CV-3658 and 00-CV-8029 (S.D.N.Y) (controlled release opioid pharmaceuticals; client Purdue Pharma obtained preliminary injunction, affirmed by the Federal Circuit)
  • Plasma Physics v. IBM et al., Nos. 02-3463, 3473, 3475 and 3484 (E.D.N.Y.) (plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition methods of semiconductor manufacturing)
  • Verizon California v. RAKTL, No. 01-CV-09871 (C.D.Cal.) (interactive telephony; case settled after client RAKTL obtained favorable Markman ruling)
  • Khedesian v. Bombardier, SACV 99-532 (C.D.Cal.) (suspension system used in jet-skis; client Bombardier obtained summary judgment of noninfringement)

© 2020 Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP

Privacy Policy