Aimee N. Soucie is Counsel at Kenyon & Kenyon LLP. Ms. Soucie joined Kenyon as an associate in 2002 after working at the firm as a summer associate in 2001. Ms. Soucie’s practice focuses on patent litigation, with an emphasis in the chemical, pharmaceutical, medical and biological arts. When she began her career at Kenyon & Kenyon, her practice primarily concerned pharmaceutical litigation related to the Hatch-Waxman Act, particularly with respect to the representation of the ANDA applicant. However, she also became involved with many of the firm’s investigations pending before the International Trade Commission.

Litigations in which Ms. Soucie participated include:

  • Certain Sucralose, Sweeteners Containing Sucralose, and Related Intermediate Compounds Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-604 (ITC 2008) – participated in the successful defense of Hebei Sukerui against Tate & Lyle’s allegations of patent infringement, preserving Hebei Sukerui’s ability to import a generic version of Splenda® (sucralose) into the United States.
  • Pfizer, Inc. v. Synthon Holdings BV, et al. (M.D.N.C. 2006) – participated in the defense of Synthon in ANDA litigation against Pfizer’s allegations of patent infringement by a generic version of Norvasc® (amlodipine besylate monohydrate) (Federal Circuit held in 2007 that Pfizer’s patent was invalid).
  • SmithKline Beecham, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., (D.N.J. 2005) – participated in the defense of Teva in ANDA litigation against SKB’s allegations of patent infringement by a generic version of Lamictal® (lamotrigine) (case settled favorably after trial).

In 2008, Ms. Soucie left Kenyon & Kenyon to join the U.S. International Trade Commission as an Attorney-Advisor to the Administrative Law Judges. While at the ITC, Ms. Soucie was required to develop strategic, logical approaches to apply existing and novel law to fact in fast-moving investigations with targeted time limits of 12-15 months, acquire substantial knowledge of a wide variety of complex technologies and products, and advise the ALJs regarding procedural and substantive issues, including determinations deciding matters of infringement, invalidity, and enforceability.

Key representative investigations to which Ms. Soucie contributed to include: 

  • Inv. No. 337-TA-692 (ceramic capacitors) 
  • Inv. No. 337-TA-666 (cold cathode fluorescent lamp inverter circuits) 
  • Inv. No. 337-TA-658 (video game machines)
  • Inv. No. 337-TA-631 (liquid crystal display devices)
  • Inv. No. 337-TA-628 (computer products and components)
  • Inv. No. 337-TA-621 (probe card assemblies)
  • Inv. No. 337-TA-619 (flash memory controllers)
  • Inv. No. 337-TA-613 (3G mobile handsets)

In 2010, after completing her two-year term at the ITC, Ms. Soucie re-joined Kenyon & Kenyon as Counsel. As an attorney at the ITC, Ms. Soucie gained an insider’s understanding of the Commission’s culture and an in-depth knowledge of the substantive and procedural complexities of Section 337 ITC actions. In addition to ITC investigations, Ms. Soucie has been involved with other patent and trade secret litigation before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and various district courts, and has prepared legal opinions and analysis of patents.

Ms. Soucie is a co-author and editor of the de facto treatise on Section 337, Unfair Competition and the ITC. She also co-authored several chapters of Pharmaceutical, Biotechnology and Chemical Inventions: World Protection and Exploitation, Bucknell D (ed.): Oxford University Press 2010, which highlights and analyzes issues arising in obtaining, commercializing, enforcing, and attacking global intellectual property rights across world jurisdictions; “The Mere Filing of an ANDA is Not Willful Infringement,” Kenyon & Kenyon IP Topics (Oct. 2004), which discusses Federal Circuit judgment re: willful infringement in pharmaceutical cases; and, “Westchester Media Co., L.P. v. PRL USA Holdings, Inc.,” Kenyon & Kenyon IP Topics (Nov. 2002) (Originally Published in The World Trademark Law Report, Nov. 2002), which discusses Southern District of Texas judgment re: Westchester Media Company’s use of Polo Ralph Lauren’s trademark, “POLO,” as name of its magazine.

bar and court admissions
  • District of Columbia
  • New York
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit