This site makes use of Javascript, please enable your web browser to allow Javascript. Thank you.
Krista Carter

Krista Carter


Silicon Valley
T: +1 650 319 4536
F: +1 650 319 4700

icon Download vCard

Legal Services


  • Santa Clara University School of Law
    JD, 2002
  • University of Nebraska
    BA, 1998

Bar Admission(s)

  • California
  • US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • US District Court for the Northern District of California

Krista Carter is Counsel in the Intellectual Property Litigation Group and focuses her practice on patent litigation, due diligence, and strategic counseling for innovative biotechnology, pharmaceutical, and technology companies. She also has experience in trade secrets, licensing, antitrust and unfair competition litigation, and proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Prior to her legal career, Krista served in the U.S. Air Force.

Representative Matters
  • AAT Bioquest, Inc. v. Texas Fluorescence Labs., Inc. Serves as lead trial counsel for AAT Bioquest in competitor patent infringement litigation involving a novel fluo calcium ion indicator.  After prevailing on all liability issues during summary judgment and securing a permanent injunction, AAT Bioquest was awarded trebled lost profits.
  • Miotox LLC v. Allergan, Inc. Represents Miotox as trial counsel to enforce a License Agreement related to the use of Botox® for migraine headaches and defending patent counterclaims raised by Allergan.
  • Callidus Software v. Xactly Corp. Represented Callidus in enforcing its patents and asserting business tort and breach of contract claims. The case settled in mediation on terms favorable to Callidus. 
  • Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. Represented Roche in conducting due diligence projects in the context of freedom-to-operate analyses
  • Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc. and the University of Miami v. Optovue, Inc. Represented Optovue in defending a patent infringement action relating to an ophthalmic imaging technique (optical coherence tomography) brought by a competitor against its core product lines. The case settled on terms favorable to Optovue.
  • Amgen Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Served as trial counsel for Amgen in a pending patent infringement case involving granulocyte colony stimulating factor. The case settled on terms favorable to Amgen.
  • Human Genome Sciences v. Immunex Corp. Served as appellate counsel for Immunex/Amgen in a Section 146 appeal of an interference proceeding involving TRAIL receptors. The district court dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and the Federal Circuit appeal was dismissed in Immunex/Amgen’s favor.
  • Amgen Inc. v. Hoffman La-Roche Ltd. Represented Amgen in enforcing its U.S. erythropoietin ("EPO") patents against Roche first through an exclusion proceeding before the ITC and then in a patent litigation action before a jury in the District Court of Massachusetts. After a five-week jury and bench trial, the jury returned a verdict in Amgen’s favor on both infringement and validity for each of the asserted patent-in-suit and the court entered final judgment and a permanent injunction in Amgen’s favor.
  • ePlus v. SAP. Served as counsel for SAP in a patent infringement suit and reexamination proceedings involving electronic sourcing systems and related methods. The patent suit was tried in a four-week jury trial.
  • Amgen Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel (Aventis) and Transkaryotic Therapies. Served as appellate counsel for Amgen in a patent infringement suit enforcing Amgen's EPO patents.
  • Chapter 9:  Biosimilars: The New Abbreviated Regulatory Approval Pathway, Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook, 2015 Ed.
  • Chapter 10: Biotechnology Patent Litigation, Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 Supp. and 2015 Ed.
  • Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies: Supreme Court Reinstates Liability for Inducing  Infringement Under § 271(b) Requires Direct Infringement Under § 271(a), June 3, 2014
  • Implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Myriad Decision on Human Gene Patents and Other Biotechnology Inventions, June 20, 2013
  • Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, and Trade Secrets for In-House Counsel, Fourth Edition, Association of Corporate Counsel, October 2012
  • Preventing the Kiss-and-Tell: Strategies and a Checklist for Protecting Trade Secrets in Collaborations, Corporate Counsel, May 14, 2012
  • Annual Review: Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals, Financier Worldwide, February 2012
  • Chapter 8: Using Recent IP Developments to Your Tactical Advantage, Inside the Minds: Recent Trends in Patent Infringement Lawsuits, February 2012
Speaking Engagements
  • The Changing Tides of Patent Law:  Recent Developments and Trends Affecting Litigation, Prosecution, and PTAB Proceedings, Bridgeport Continuing Education Program, May 21, 2015
  • Why Trade Secrets Matter: Developing a Comprehensive Trade Secret Protection Program, Bridgeport Continuing Education Program, May 15, 2015
  • Top 10 Recent Developments in Life Sciences from 2013-2014, Association of Corporate Counsel San Francisco Bay Area Life Sciences Committee, June 4, 2014
  • IP Year in Review: Trends and Developments of 2013, Women’s Intellectual Property Lawyers Association, March 12, 2014
  • What Every In-House Counsel and CA Attorney Needs to Know About Trade Secrets, Bridgeport Continuing Education Program, December 5, 2013
  • IPO’s Trade Secrets Committee Roundtable Discussion, May 15, 2013
  • Collaborating with Your Eyes Wide Open: Strategies for Protecting Trade Secrets,” Managing IP Panel, October 17, 2012
  • Preventing the Kiss and Tell: Protecting Trade Secrets in Collaborations, Association of Corporate Counsel San Francisco Bay Area, February 28, 2012
  • Injunctions:  The World after eBay v. MercExchange, Practising Law Institute Conference on Patent Litigation, October 2009