Tamara Fraizer helps her clients assess intellectual property (IP) related issues, leverage and enforce IP rights and defend against IP claims. Her expertise is patent litigation and she has litigated numerous patent cases in federal courts across the nation and at the US International Trade Commission. She is also a patent lawyer qualified to prosecute patents before the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) and handle post-grant challenges to them. In addition to fighting for her clients in the courts and at the PTO, Tamara relies upon over 16 years of legal experience to provide her clients with sound IP assessments and counseling, and to help them effectively manage their IP disputes.

    Tamara’s experience spans a variety of industries including life sciences, medical device, data analytics, pharmaceuticals, healthcare-related consumer products and software. She holds a PhD in Population Biology, which involves mathematical modeling of biological systems, and has active interests in digital health, bioinformatics and personalized medicine.

    Tamara has litigated for and advised private businesses of all sizes, as well as the largest public corporations. She understands the strategic challenges that such companies face in developing and enforcing their patent portfolios, especially in competitive situations, and in defending against patents asserted by companies of all kinds. She works closely with her clients to understand their priorities and manage legal disputes with their business and overall goals in mind.

    As a former university lecturer, Tamara enjoys speaking on IP law topics and mentoring younger lawyers. She also enjoys counseling entrepreneurs and start-ups on their IP strategy, helping position them for success.

    Award Mouse thought multimedia interface book medal screen monitor

    Life Sciences

    • Represented a medical device company in assertion of patent on systems and methods for radiotherapy treatment, coordinated the handling of proceedings between the same parties in the US, UK, Germany and the US PTO, and worked with the client to settle all matters.
    • Represented a healthcare product company in assertion of patents on cold compression therapy and assisted with prosecution of patents. Case settled.
    • Represented a pharmaceutical company in assertion of newly issued patents on an ophthalmic NSAID formulation against three companies having generic versions already on the market. All cases settled favorably late in discovery or after Markman order.
    • Represented a biotechnology company, taking over longstanding litigation between the parties after appeal to the Federal Circuit. Conducted trial focused on inventorship of RNase H minus reverse transcriptase and potential damages. Case settled during trial.
    • Represented a biotechnology company in a case involving inventorship and ownership dispute of polymerase blends for use in PCR. Obtained favorable cross-license and settlement.
    • Defended a pharmaceutical company in one of many multiparty litigations brought by another pharmaceutical company regarding methods and compositions for treatment of the skin. Successfully limited potential liability. Case settled.
    • Defended a biotechnology company in a patent infringement suit regarding fluorescence polarization assay for kinase reaction. Defeated preliminary injunction motion. Case settled after Markman hearing.
    • Represented a biotechnology company in assertion of patents for a genetically modified tissue plasminogen activator, implicating products used for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Case settled for favorable cross-license.


    • Defended a global technology corporation in seven cases brought against it and various other internet and technology companies regarding internet technologies relating to maps, advertising and gaming. Obtained dismissal, stipulated judgment or stay with favorable reexamination decision.
    • Defended a global technology corporation against claims of infringement of early 1990’s patent on certain aspects of relational databases. Case settled favorably with limited discovery.
    • Defended and asserted patents of an energy efficient lighting manufacturer in a multi-patent litigation between competitors concerning their occupancy sensor light switch products. Resolved favorably prior to trial.
    • Represented the licensee of a garage door opener manufacturer in a patent infringement action concerning security algorithm software and transmitter hardware for use in garage door technology. Resolved to the satisfaction of the client prior to trial.
    • Defended a software company in a patent infringement suit brought by a competitor regarding software for wireless communications. Parties merged after trial.
    • Represented a design automation company in assertion of patent infringement claims implicating an electronic design automation company’s popular chip design software. Case settled after Markman hearing and expert reports.

    Other Technologies

    • Settled cofounder dispute involving rights to patent and technology on the eve of trial.
    • Successfully defended a client in a multi-patent investigation concerning the design, manufacture and use of probe card assemblies. Invalidated claims of two patents and demonstrated no infringement of any of the asserted patents, with determination affirmed by the ITC.
    • Successfully asserted patents relating to circuits used in power supplies. Jury found that defendant had willfully infringed all four patents asserted in the case, and awarded damages of US$34 million. A second jury found all asserted claims not invalid.
    • Represented an electronic components supplier in assertion of patents on circuits used in power supplies. Prevailed at trial in the ITC, where the patents were found to be valid and infringed, and obtained order excluding downstream products from importation into the US. Decision upheld on appeal to the Federal Circuit.
    • Represented a technology company in multi-forum dispute involving 34 patents on various technologies used in cell phones. Case settled favorably.


    • Stanford University, J.D., 2001
    • University of California, Davis, Ph.D., 1996
    • University of Kansas, B.S., with honors and highest distinction, 1987


    • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2002
    • California, 2001
    • Named Profiles in Diversity Journal’s Women Worth Watching in STEM in 2017
    • California Super Lawyer in IP Litigation for 2011-2013 and 2016-2019

    {{insights.date}} {{insights.source}} {{insights.type}}
    {{blog.title}} {{blog.source}}

    • “Is the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation of Claim Terms, as Applied in Inter Partes Review, Converging on the Standard Applied in Litigation?” Global Business IP and Technology Blog, January 3, 2017.
    • Author, “A Guide to Developing an International Patent Portfolio,” San Francisco Daily Journal, November 28, 2016.
    • Author, “Taking Stock of Rule 101,” Intellectual Property Magazine, June 2, 2016.
    • Author, “The New Way to Plead,” Intellectual Property Magazine, December 15, 2015.
    • Author, “The Inter Partes Review Indefiniteness Trap,” Law360 Expert Opinion, November 17, 2015.
    • Author, “The Federal Circuit Declines to Revisit its Decision that the Biosimilars Patent Dance is Optional – Next Stop, Supreme Court?,” Global Business IP and Technology Blog, October 19, 2015.
    • Author, “Imports that Induce Subsequent Infringement are (Again) Subject to the Authority of the ITC,” Global Business IP and Technology Blog, September 10, 2015.
    • Author, “The Single Party Rule for Direct Patent Infringement: Guidance from the Federal Circuit’s latest Akamai vs. Limelight Decision,” Global Business IP and Technology Blog, August 19, 2015.
    • Source and Quoted, “Rise of the Machines,” Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review, June 20, 2014.
    • Author, “U.S. v. Caronia: What are the Implications?” Pharmaceutical Compliance Monitor, March 15, 2013.

    Award Mouse thought multimedia interface book medal screen monitor