Adam is an experienced IP litigator who primarily serves life sciences and defense industry clients. He is lead counsel, handling patent and trade secret disputes, in addition to providing strategic counsel on IP portfolio development, licensing and enforcement. Adam has a strong record of success in multiparty, highly contested Hatch-Waxman litigation, in addition to other litigations involving advanced biochemistry, polymers, optics, manufacturing processes, and other cutting edge technologies. He has tried cases before multiple US district courts, briefed and argued cases before the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and briefed bet-the-company issues before the US Supreme Court.

For pharmaceutical clients, Adam leverages his trial and appellate experience in litigation when advising on new product development, regulatory strategy, Orange Book listing, citizen petition practice, and the settlement of multiparty, highly contested Hatch-Waxman litigation. Adam also advises on due diligence, including reviewing and assessing litigation, regulatory, and competitive strategies.

Jazz Pharmaceuticals Ireland, Ltd. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 21-cv-14271, 23-cv-01617, 24-cv-08785. Lead counsel to Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in consolidated ANDA litigations involving mixed salt formulation of gamma hydroxybutyrate oral solution.
Trupanion, Inc. v. Destination Pet, Inc., No. 23-2-18452 (Sup. Ct.King Cty). Lead counsel to Destination Pet, Inc. in defense of trade secret misappropriation claims and prosecution of counterclaim for abuse of process.
Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc. v. GL Leading, Inc., 1:19-cv-02648 (N.D. Ill.), 24-1182 (7th Cir.) – Lead counsel to Philips in a case brought against domestic and international competitors, inter alia, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets relating to the design and manufacture of X-ray tubes used in commuted tomography. Obtained sanction of default judgement against China-based companies after successfully defeating serial motions to dismiss and compelling discovery over China State Secrets and Data Protection Law objections. Obtained permanent injunction with no geographic or temporal limitation, in addition to an award of attorneys’ fees and contempt sanctions against China-based defendants. Obtained summary dismissal of interlocutory appeal of contempt sanctions, and stay of litigation against U.S.-based defendants in view of pending criminal investigation of related misconduct of U.S. defendants by U.S. Department of Justice.
Keter Home and Garden Products, Ltd. v. Five Hole International, LLC, 1:21-cv-01291 (D. Del.) – Lead Counsel to Keter in trade secret and patent inventorship dispute. Obtained extremely favorable settlement resulting in assignment of disputed patent application.
Keter Luxembourg Sarl v. Home Products International – North America, Inc., 1:21-cv-00477 (D. Del.) – Lead counsel to Keter in patent infringement litigation involving design patent covering highly successful line of consumer products. Obtained favorable early settlement prohibiting continued marketing of accused products in U.S. and other global markets.
Horizon Medicines LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., 2:20-cv-08188 (D.N.J.) – Lead Counsel to Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., in ANDA litigation involving fixed-dose oral combination product. Obtained dismissal with prejudice after briefing case-dispositive claim construction.
Evoke Pharma, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1:22-cv-02019 (D.N.J.) - Lead Counsel to Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., in ANDA litigation involving metoclopramide nasal spray product.
WePower Technologies LLC v. GenerEN, LLC, 7:22-cv-03364 (S.D.N.Y) – Co-lead counsel to WePower in trade secret misappropriation litigation seeking, inter alia, assignment of patent purporting to claim misappropriated energy harvesting technology.
Lions Investment & Trading, Inc. v. Republic Floor, LLC, 22-cv-02777 (C.D. Cal.) – Lead counsel to defendant in trademark and unfair competition litigation. Efficiently obtained favorable negotiated resolution.
ClimaCell, Inc. v. Hagit Messer-Yaron, 1:19-cv-11487 (D. Mass.) – Lead counsel to individual defendant in trade secret and breach of contract litigation. Obtained highly favorable settlement during pendency of motions to dismiss.
Rehrig Pacific Co. v. Polymer Logistics (Israel), Ltd., et al., 2:19-cv-04952 (C.D. Cal.) – Lead counsel to Polymer Logistics (Israel) Ltd., defended claims of patent infringement brought by a competitor. Successfully brought a motion to transfer the action from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia to the Central District of California, and also obtained dismissal of willful infringement claims through the strategic use of Rule 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6) motion practice.
Green Cross Corporation v. Shire Human Genetic Therapies, Inc., Appeal No. 17-2071 (Fed. Cir) – Served as appellate counsel to Green Cross Corporation, successfully defeating a motion to dismiss for lack of standing to challenge a final written decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Kowa Pharmaceuticals America et al v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, and related cases – Represented plaintiffs Kowa Company, Ltd., Kowa Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. and Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd. in litigation which involved compound, formulation, and polymorph patents directed toward quinoline-type mevalonolactones (or, pitavastatin calcium) relating to the drug product Livalo®. Presented the plaintiffs' infringement case at 10-day trial, through which plaintiffs prevailed on all issues. Also represented Kowa and Nissan in connection with the Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the district court’s judgment, and was involved in the team’s successful POPR, resulting in a denial of institution of three petitions for inter partes reviews filed by defendants in these cases.
Novatrans Group S.A. v. Vital Farms, Inc., et al, 1:18-cv-01012 (D. Del.) – Lead counsel, representing Novatrans Group S.A. (“Novatrans”). Brought a claim for declaratory judgment to require assignment of certain patent rights and a claim under the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act in the District of Delaware, while simultaneously defending a breach of contract claim against Novatrans in the Western District of Texas. These cases involved duelling claims of inventorship of a system to determine the fertility status and gender of an avian egg before hatching. Obtained a settlement resulting in publicly recorded assignments of the contested patent application to Novatrans.
CAI Software , LLC v. Multimetco, Inc., 1:19-cv-00540 (D.R.I.) – Lead counsel to plaintiff in trade secret misappropriation and copyright infringement litigation.
M&C Innovations, LLC v. Igloo Products Corp., 4:17-cv-02372 (W.D. Tex.) – Served as lead counsel, defending Igloo from allegations of patent infringement and unfair competition involving one of his client’s most significant product lines.
Wireless Monitoring Systems, LLC v. SimpliSafe, Inc., 2:16-cv-1241 (E.D. Tex) – Successfully defended claim of patent infringement by non-practicing entity.
Tangelo IP, LLC v. TigerDirect, Inc., 2:15-cv-00771 (E.D. Tex.) – Successfully defended claim of patent infringement by non-practicing entity, after being engaged by supplier of accused technology. Obtained favorable outcome for supplier all end-users of accused technology.
Inline Plastics Corp. v. EasyPak, LLC, 799 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2015) – Served as principal appellate counsel, arguing for reversal and remand on case-dispositive claim construction. Previously obtained dismissal of invalidity counterclaims and entry of judgment on infringement to permit expedited appeal. Inline achieved highly-favorable settlement on remand.
MKS Instruments v. Emphysys, C.A. No. 12-1858-BLS (Ma. Super. Ct.) – Served as lead counsel, defending against claims of trade secret misappropriation related to advanced semiconductor manufacturing technology. The case settled very favorably after a positive summary judgment hearing.
MeadWestvaco v. Rexam, Appeal No. 12-1518 (Fed. Cir.) – Served as principal appellate counsel, and subsequently represented the plaintiff-appellee on remand to the Eastern District of Virginia. The appeal dealt with matters of claim construction, summary judgment decision of non-obviousness, denial of summary judgment of indefiniteness, and bench finding of infringement.
Dallakian v. IPG Photonics, 3:14-cv-11863-TSH (D. Mass.) – Served as lead counsel, successfully defending against claims for correction of inventorship and trade secret misappropriation. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the complaint after defendant secured expedited discovery and an early summary judgment motion.
VLP Watertown L.P. v. Tristate Breeders Cooperative d/b/a/ Accelerated Genetics, 1:07-cv-11487-GAO (D. Mass.) – Represented VLP in litigation of trade secret misappropriation claims involving a cell processing method shown to improve fertility and induce statistically significant female gender bias in dairy herds. Obtained jury verdict of trade secret misappropriation and multimillion-dollar judgment in our client’s favor.
Mitsubishi Chem. Co. v. Barr Labs., Inc., 718 F. Supp. 2d 382 (S.D.N.Y. 2010), aff’d, 435 Fed. Appx. 927 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 2, 2011) – Served as trial and appellate counsel to pioneer pharmaceutical company in a Hatch-Waxman patent infringement action.
Takeda Chem. Indus., Ltd. v. Mylan Labs. Inc., 417 F. Supp. 2d 341 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) – Served as trial and appellate counsel to pioneer pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman patent infringement action.

Read less

Judge Alsup Certifies Two Hot Button Issues on Standard for Pleading Willful Infringement for Interlocutory Appeal to the CAFC

March 23, 2022 | Blog | By Joe Rutkowski, Peter Cuomo, Adam Samansky

On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement, holding that:

The complaint itself is insufficient to provide the requisite knowledge of the asserted patents and alleged infringement; and
Patent owners need not otherwise allege egregious infringing behavior as part of a willful infringement claim.

Recognizing the split among district courts on these issues, the court certified its decision for interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Thus, the Federal Circuit may soon have an opportunity to resolve this long-standing split among districts, which, according to Judge Alsup, has consumed a “vast amount of resources” in litigation around the country.

March 10, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Michael McNamara, Nicholas Armington , Oliver Ennis

Since the passage of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), trade secret owners have been able to use allegations of trade secret misappropriation under the DTSA to support civil claims under the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Specifically, DTSA violations that qualify as predicate acts can be used to show a pattern of racketeering activity, which may allow a trade secret owner to state civil claims under RICO, and thus take advantage of the substantial remedies that the RICO statute provides, including the potential for treble damages and attorney’s fees.

February 24, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Joe Rutkowski, Tianyi Tan

On January 26, 2022, in what appears to be a case of first impression, U.S. District Court Judge John Z. Lee of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied a biosimilar applicant defendant’s motion to dismiss patent infringement claims brought in the second phase of the parties’ Biosimilar Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”) litigation. In so doing, Judge Lee held that the reference product sponsor (“RPS”) plaintiff is not limited to only declaratory judgment actions in the second phase of litigation under the BPCIA.

Intellectual Property Viewpoints Thumbnail

D. Del. Says ANDA Specification Trumps All Else in Infringement Analysis

February 17, 2022 | Blog | By Peter Cuomo, Adam Samansky, Joe Rutkowski, Tianyi Tan

On February 8, 2022, U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware granted the plaintiff’s motion to exclude defendant’s expert testimony for being “based on an erroneous legal theory” in a suit alleging defendants’ proposed generic Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA”) product would infringe Exela’s patents under the Hatch-Waxman Act. Judge Noreika’s decision in this case reinforces the Federal Circuit’s holding in Sunovion and serves as a reminder that ANDA product infringement is primarily assessed by comparing the asserted claims with the ANDA specification, rather than other ANDA submission materials further describing the ANDA product.

February 8, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski

On January 18, 2022, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner of the Central District of California sided with the majority of divided district courts, dismissing claims of willful and induced infringement that based the defendants’ required knowledge of the asserted patents on its receipt of the original complaint for patent infringement. Ravgen Inc. v. Quest Diagnostics Inc., No. 21-cv-09011 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2022) ECF 146 - Order dismiss willful infringement

January 25, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington

Last year, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York addressed an issue of first impression concerning what constitutes “misappropriation” under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) in a decision potentially relevant to cases involving allegations of trade secret misappropriation under the DTSA against a former employee. This case is worthy of note for any trade secret practitioner and is an important reminder that when pleading alleged trade secret misappropriation, it is not only important to describe the trade secret with sufficient particularity, but also to sufficiently describe the alleged misappropriation so as to illustrate the alleged acquisition of the trade secret by improper means or disclosure of the trade secret without consent.

Federal Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Hatch-Waxman Defendants for Lack of Venue and Failure to State a Claim

November 12, 2021 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski

On November 5, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Celgene Corp. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 21-1154, affirmed a decision from the District Court of New Jersey dismissing a suit brought by Celgene Corporation (“Celgene”) under Rule 12(b)(6) for improper venue as to defendants Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“MPI”) and Mylan Inc. and for the failure to state a claim against defendant Mylan N.V. Celgene had brought suit after MPI submitted an ANDA seeking approval to market a generic version of the drug Pomalyst used to treat multiple myeloma. In assessing venue, the court held that it was MPI’s ANDA submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), and not the sending of a notice letter to Celgene in New Jersey, that was the artificial act of infringement pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. The district court thus held, and the Federal Circuit affirmed, that venue in New Jersey was improper.

October 26, 2021 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski

On September 28, 2021, in a precedential opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Nos. 2020-1685, -1704, clarified its decision from a prior appeal in the same case to hold that a finding of willful infringement requires only deliberate or intentional infringement, not egregious, wanton, malicious, or bad-faith infringement conduct.

September 21, 2021 | Blog | By Thomas Wintner, Adam Samansky, Joe Rutkowski

In what appears to be a case of first impression, on August 23, 2021 U.S. District Judge John Z. Lee of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied a biosimilar applicant’s motion to dismiss a patent infringement suit brought under the Biosimilar Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”) against a foreign parent corporation that did not file or sign the relevant abbreviated Biologics License Application (“aBLA”).

September 9, 2021 | Blog | By Peter Cuomo, Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington

Read less

66 Mintz Attorneys Recognized as 2024 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

October 02, 2024

Mintz is pleased to announce that 31 attorneys have been named Massachusetts Super Lawyers and 35 attorneys have been named Massachusetts Rising Stars for 2024.

The Best Lawyers in America 2025 Recognizes 184 Mintz Attorneys across 56 Practice Areas

August 15, 2024

187 Mintz attorneys have been recognized by Best Lawyers® in the 2025 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©. Notably, three Mintz attorneys received 2025 “Lawyer of the Year” awards, and 64 firm attorneys were included in the 2025 edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch.

Mintz Advises Daré Bioscience in $22M Non-Dilutive Strategic Royalty and Revenue Interest Financing

May 13, 2024

Nine Mintz IP Attorneys Named In 2024 IAM Strategy 300 Global Leaders Guide

December 04, 2023

BOSTON – Nine Intellectual Property attorneys from Mintz have been recognized in the 2024 edition of the Intellectual Asset Management (IAM) Strategy 300 Global Leaders Guide.

Fifty-Nine Attorneys Recognized as 2023 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

October 12, 2023

Mintz is pleased to announce that 32 attorneys have been named Massachusetts Super Lawyers and 27 attorneys have been named Massachusetts Rising Stars for 2023.

Nine Mintz Attorneys Named To IAM Strategy 300 List Of Leading IP Strategists

September 28, 2023

Mintz is pleased to announce that Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud and Members Matthew Galica, Frank Gerratana, Marguerite McConihe, Michael Newman, Adam Rizk, Adam Samansky, Daniel Weinger, and James Wodarski have been named to the 2023 IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists list.

One Hundred Twenty Mintz Attorneys Ranked as Leaders by Best Lawyers 2024

August 17, 2023

Mintz is pleased to announce that 120 firm attorneys have been recognized as leaders by Best Lawyers® in the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©.

Mintz Shows Dedication to Cancer Research by Sponsoring the Pan-Mass Challenge

April 28, 2023

BOSTON – Mintz is pleased to announce that it has become an official sponsor of the Pan-Mass Challenge (PMC).

Noncompetes Could Be Banned Nationally. Here's How It Would Affect Mass.

January 20, 2023

Member Adam Samansky spoke to The Boston Business Journal about the FTC's proposal to ban noncompete agreements.

Why Cellect's Federal Circuit Case Is One To Watch

December 16, 2022

Members Adam Samansky and Peter Cuomo spoke to Managing IP on the implications that a pending case in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit could have on litigation and prosecution strategies for life sciences companies.

Watching The DTSA Court Split On Inevitable Disclosure

October 18, 2022

Mintz Member Adam Samansky and Associates Nicholas Armington and Oliver Ennis co-authored an article re-published in Law360 exploring the split amongst federal courts on the Defend Trade Secrets Act.

Sixty Mintz Attorneys Recognized as Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

October 11, 2022

35 Mintz attorneys have been named Massachusetts Super Lawyers and 25 Mintz attorneys have been named Massachusetts Rising Stars for 2022.

One Hundred Eight Mintz Attorneys Ranked as Leaders by Best Lawyers 2023

August 18, 2022

Best Lawyers® recognized 108 firm attorneys in the 2023 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©. Notably, two Mintz attorneys – Poonam Patidar and Scott M. Stanton – received 2023 “Lawyer of the Year” awards, and 28 firm attorneys were included in the inaugural edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch.

As ANDA Suit Venue Options Shrink, Del., NJ Rule For Now

November 29, 2021

Mintz Members Peter Cuomo and Adam Samansky and Associate Joseph Rutkowski were quoted in an article published by Law360 on the potential implications of the Federal Circuit’s recent ruling in Celgene Corp. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., which cemented a prior decision in Valeant v. Mylan holding that patent suits against generic drugmakers must be filed where the company is incorporated or where it performed actions related to its Abbreviated New Drug Application.

Fifty-Five Mintz Attorneys Recognized as 2021 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

October 12, 2021

One Hundred Six Mintz Attorneys Ranked as Leaders by Best Lawyers 2022

August 19, 2021

One Hundred Ten Mintz Attorneys Ranked as Leaders by Best Lawyers 2021

August 20, 2020|

SCOTUS Doctrine of Equivalents Case Refusal is Good News for Patent Owners

July 14, 2020

Mintz Members Peter Cuomo and Adam Samansky co-authored an article published by IAM examining the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to deny a petition for certiorari in Eli Lilly and Co. v Hospira, Inc., upholding the infringement of Eli Lilly’s chemotherapy drug Alimta (pemetrexed), and what the development means for the doctrine of equivalents and for patent application amendments.

Philips Says Chinese Rivals Can't Skirt Ill. Trade Secret Suit

June 24, 2020

Law360 covered developments in a trade secret lawsuit involving X-ray tubes brought on by Mintz client Philips Medical Systems, Inc. against Chinese companies Kunshan GuoLi Electronic Technology Co. Ltd. and its subsidiary, Kunshan Yiyuan Medical Technology Co. Ltd.

The Estoppel Questions On The Minds Of Patent Challengers

September 9, 2019

In this article published by Law360, Mintz Members Adam Samansky and Peter Cuomo commented on lingering questions related to the America Invents Act's estoppel provision, which prevents challengers from arguing in court that a patent is invalid on grounds that were raised — or reasonably could have been raised — during inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

One Hundred Mintz Attorneys Ranked as Leaders by Best Lawyers 2020

August 15, 2019

Victory on Appeal After Lengthy Litigation Over Cholesterol Inhibitor

December 14, 2018

Seventy Mintz Attorneys Named 2018 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

October 18, 2018

Eighty-Nine Mintz Attorneys Included in the Best Lawyers in America, 2019 Edition

August 15, 2018

Mintz Secures Full Patent Victory for Kowa Pharmaceuticals and Nissan Chemical in Lengthy Battle

September 22, 2017

Mintz has secured a string of substantial victories in Hatch-Waxman litigation for innovative drug manufacturers Kowa Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Kowa Pharmaceuticals America, Inc., and Nissan Chemical Industries Ltd.

Eighty-Five Mintz Attorneys Included in the Best Lawyers in America, 2018 Edition

August 15, 2017

Best Lawyers named 85 Mintz attorneys to its 2018 list of The Best Lawyers in America. In addition, Mintz attorneys Matthew J. Gardella and Samuel M. Tony Starr were named “Lawyer of the Year” in their respective practice areas.

Mintz Triumphs for SL Corporation and Hyundai Motor America, Inc. Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

March 16, 2017

Mintz announced a pair of victories before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on behalf of SL Corporation and Hyundai Motor America, Inc. against Adaptive Headlamp Technologies, Inc.

Eighty-Four Mintz Attorneys Named 2016 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

October 18, 2016

Fifty-three Mintz attorneys have been named Massachusetts Super Lawyers for 2016 and thirty-one have been named Massachusetts Rising Stars. The findings will be published in the November 2016 issue of Boston Magazine and in a stand-alone magazine, New England Super Lawyers.

Mintz Secures Unprecedented Appellate Victory on Behalf of Straight Path IP Group, Inc.

November 30, 2015

Eighty-Nine Mintz Attorneys Named 2015 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

October 19, 2015

Mintz Further Expands IP Practice with Eighteen Attorneys

January 09, 2015

Read less

Panelist

Oct

2024

Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Conference

American Conference Institute

Virtual

Panelist

Apr

2024

Empowering Innovation: Navigating the Future of IP

BPIP Conference

Panelist

Mar

2024

IP in the Digital Age: Trends and Transformations

Boston Bar Association IP Year In Review Conference

Speaker

May

2023

Boston Intellectual Property Law Association 2023 Symposium

Speaker

Mar

2021

IPBC Connect 2021

IAM

Virtual Event

Speaker

Oct

2020

Trade Secret Threat Looms Due to Economic Downturn: Protecting and enforcing trade secrets in the COVID era

View the Webinar Recording

Speaker

Aug

2020

Trade Secret Threat Looms Due to Economic Downturn

View the Webinar Recording

Panelist

Apr

2019

BPIP 7th Annual Conference

Best Practices in Intellectual Property

Sheraton Tel Aviv Tel Aviv, Israel

Moderator

Jun

2018

Data Protection at the Intersection of Trade Secrets and Cybersecurity

Boston Patent Law Association

Mintz Levin One Financial Center Boston, MA

Speaker

Apr

2018

AIPPI-Israel’s 3rd Annual International Convention on the Economy of Innovation

AIPPI-Israel

David Intercontinental Hotel 12, Kaufman Street Tel Aviv, Israel

Speaker

Mar

2018

BPIP 6th Annual Conference

Best Practices in Intellectual Property

Sheraton Tel Aviv Tel Aviv, Israel

Mar

2017

Life Sciences Breakfast

GKH Law Offices

Tel Aviv

Speaker

Dec

2015

2015 U.S. Supreme Court Year in Review

Webinar

Speaker

Sep

2015

2015 U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit Year in Review

Gross, Kleinhendler, Hodak, Halevy, Greenberg & Co.

One Azrieli Center, Round Building, Tel Aviv, Israel

Speaker

May

2015

IP Best Practices Conference 2015

Intellectual Property Resources

Tel Aviv, Israel

Read less

Best Lawyers in America: Intellectual Property Litigation (2018 - 2025)
Named to IAM Strategy 300: Global Leaders (2024)
Included on the Massachusetts Super Lawyers - Intellectual Property Litigation list (2021 – 2023)
Included on the Massachusetts Super Lawyers: Rising Star - Intellectual Property Litigation list (2013 – 2018)

Read less

Member, Boston Bar Association
Member, American Intellectual Property Law Association
Member, Boston Intellectual Property Law Association, Co-Chair Trade Secrets Committee
Member, Federal Circuit Bar Association

Read less

July 30, 2024| Blog|

Adam P. Samansky

Member

Boston

Experience

viewpoints

March 23, 2022 | Blog | By Joe Rutkowski, Peter Cuomo, Adam Samansky

March 10, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Michael McNamara, Nicholas Armington , Oliver Ennis

February 24, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Joe Rutkowski, Tianyi Tan

February 17, 2022 | Blog | By Peter Cuomo, Adam Samansky, Joe Rutkowski, Tianyi Tan

February 8, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski

January 25, 2022 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington

November 12, 2021 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski

October 26, 2021 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski

September 21, 2021 | Blog | By Thomas Wintner, Adam Samansky, Joe Rutkowski

September 9, 2021 | Blog | By Peter Cuomo, Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington

News & Press

October 02, 2024

August 15, 2024

May 13, 2024

December 04, 2023

October 12, 2023

September 28, 2023

August 17, 2023

April 28, 2023

January 20, 2023

December 16, 2022

October 18, 2022

October 11, 2022

August 18, 2022

November 29, 2021

October 12, 2021

August 19, 2021

August 20, 2020|

July 14, 2020

June 24, 2020

September 9, 2019

August 15, 2019

December 14, 2018

October 18, 2018

August 15, 2018

September 22, 2017

August 15, 2017

March 16, 2017

October 18, 2016

November 30, 2015

October 19, 2015

January 09, 2015

Events & Speaking

American Conference Institute

Virtual

BPIP Conference

Boston Bar Association IP Year In Review Conference

IAM

Virtual Event

View the Webinar Recording

View the Webinar Recording

Best Practices in Intellectual Property

Sheraton Tel Aviv Tel Aviv, Israel

Boston Patent Law Association

Mintz Levin One Financial Center Boston, MA

AIPPI-Israel

David Intercontinental Hotel 12, Kaufman Street Tel Aviv, Israel

Best Practices in Intellectual Property

Sheraton Tel Aviv Tel Aviv, Israel

GKH Law Offices

Tel Aviv

Webinar

Gross, Kleinhendler, Hodak, Halevy, Greenberg & Co.

One Azrieli Center, Round Building, Tel Aviv, Israel

Intellectual Property Resources

Tel Aviv, Israel

Recognition & Awards

Involvement

Offices

Admissions

Related Industries

Related Practices

Education

Recent Insights

July 30, 2024| Blog|

Adam P. Samansky

Member