Skip to main content

Adam P. Samansky

Member

[email protected]

+1.617.348.1819

Share:

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.

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.

Experience

  • 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

viewpoints

On October 18, 2018, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 17-00379, held that venue was not proper in Delaware over Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“MPI”) in connection with a claim for patent infringement arising from Mylan’s submission of an Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA”) seeking approval to market a generic version of the drug, apixaban.
Read more
On April 16, 2018 in a precedential opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma v. Emcure Pharms., Nos. 2017-1798, -1799, -1800, affirmed the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey by construing the claimed chemical structure diagram to encompass at least the specific enantiomer depicted, refusing to limit the claim to only cover a racemic mixture of the (+) and (–) enantiomers, absent clear indication that the depicted enantiomer should be excluded from the claim.
Read more
Section 271 of Title 35 of the United States Code is the statute that codifies unlawful acts of patent infringement.  The most commonly asserted provisions are § 271(a) (direct infringement), § 271(b) (induced infringement), and § 271(c) (contributory infringement).
Read more
On Monday, November 27, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in SAS Institute v. Matal.
Read more
In a precedential opinion issued on October 11, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeals Board’s (“PTAB”) finding of non-obviousness where the prior art taught away from some, but not all, of the embodiments covered by the challenged claims.
Read more
On July 17, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed, in a precedential opinion in Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 2015-2066 (Fed. Cir. July 17, 2017), a district court ruling that claims of a patent directed to the Velcade® cancer treatment drug compound were invalid as obvious.
Read more
On March 3, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reaffirmed, in a precedential opinion, that prosecution disclaimers may only limit the scope of a claim where the disclaimer is “both clear and unmistakable to one of ordinary skill in the art.”
Read more
On Monday, January 9, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court denied, without comment, Mylan Pharmaceuticals’ petition for certiorari to reverse an opinion by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which affirmed a broad scope of personal jurisdiction over generic ANDA filers in patent infringement suits under the Hatch-Waxman Act.
Read more
Plaintiffs bringing patent infringement complaints under the Iqbal/Twombly pleading standard should take notice.  On September 30, 2016, a panel of the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a deficient complaint under Rule 12(b)(6).
Read more
On Friday, March 18, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed two District of Delaware rulings that non-resident defendant generic ANDA filer, Mylan, is subject to personal jurisdiction in two Hatch-Waxman suits filed in the state.
Read more
Read less

News & Press

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

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.

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

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.

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

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.

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

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.

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

Mintz is pleased to announce that Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud and Members Matthew GalicaFrank GerratanaMarguerite McConiheMichael NewmanAdam RizkAdam SamanskyDaniel Weinger, and James Wodarski have been named to the 2023 IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists list.

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

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©.

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

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

News Thumbnail Mintz

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

News Thumbnail Mintz

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.

News Thumbnail Mintz

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.

Press Release Thumbnail Mintz

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

News Thumbnail Mintz
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.
News Thumbnail Mintz
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.
News Thumbnail Mintz
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.
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.
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.
Press Release Thumbnail Mintz
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 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.
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. 
Read less

Events & Speaking

Panelist
Oct
8
2024

Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Conference

American Conference Institute

Virtual

Conference Reference Image
Panelist
Panelist
Mar
21
2024

IP in the Digital Age: Trends and Transformations

Boston Bar Association IP Year In Review Conference

Event Reference Image
Speaker
Mar
22
2021

IPBC Connect 2021

IAM

Virtual Event

Conference Reference Image
Speaker
Aug
4
2020
Webinar Reference Image
Panelist
Apr
7
2019

BPIP 7th Annual Conference

Best Practices in Intellectual Property

Sheraton Tel Aviv Tel Aviv, Israel

Moderator
Jun
28
2018

Data Protection at the Intersection of Trade Secrets and Cybersecurity

Boston Patent Law Association

Mintz Levin One Financial Center Boston, MA

Speaker
Apr
30
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
11
2018

BPIP 6th Annual Conference

Best Practices in Intellectual Property

Sheraton Tel Aviv Tel Aviv, Israel

Mar
26
2017

Life Sciences Breakfast

GKH Law Offices

Tel Aviv

Speaker
Speaker
Sep
9
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
11
2015

IP Best Practices Conference 2015

Intellectual Property Resources

Tel Aviv, Israel

Read less

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.

Recognition & Awards

  • 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

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.

Involvement

  • 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