Federal District Court

• Chr. Hansen HMO GMBH f/k/a Jennewein Biotechnologie GmbH v. Glycosyn LLC, 1:22-cv-11090 (D.MA) – Represent defendant and counter-claim plaintiff Glycosyn asserting patent on bioengineered human milk oligosaccharides (pending).
• Evoke Pharma, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1:22-cv-02019 (D.N.J.) - Represented Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., in settled ANDA litigation involving metoclopramide nasal spray product.
• Horizon Medicines LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., 2:20-cv-08188 (D.N.J.) – Represented Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., in ANDA litigation involving fixed-dose oral combination product. Obtained dismissal with prejudice after briefing case-dispositive claim construction.
• Nanoco Technologies, Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:20-cv-00038 (EDTX) - Represented Nanoco in enforcing patents directed to quantum dots used in televisions resulting in $150M settlement for client.
• Copan Italia SpA, et al. v. Puritan Medical Products Company LLC, et al.,1:18-cv-00218 (DME) - Represent Copan in enforcing patent infringement and unfair competition claims against primary competitor in a case involving the use of flocked swabs used in biological diagnostic assays.
• Rehrig Pacific Co. v. Polymer Logistics (Israel), Ltd., et al., 2:19-cv-04952 (C.D. Cal.) – Defended claims of patent infringement brought by a competitor.  Successfully transferred 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 prior to favorable settlement.
• Kowa Company, Ltd., et al. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al., Nos. 14-2758 and 14-7934 (S.D.N.Y., April 11, 2017 and September 19, 2017), affirmed, No. 2018-1051 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 10, 2018): Enforced client’s chemical compound and polymorph patents covering an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor. Patents all held valid and defendants’ ANDA approval enjoined.
• M&C Innovations, LLC v. Igloo Products Corp., 4:17-cv-02372 (W.D. Tex.) – Defended client Igloo from allegations of patent infringement and unfair competition on one of its most significant product lines.
• Adaptive Headlamp Technologies, Inc. v. Hyundai Motor America, 1-15-00563-GMS (Jun. 26, 2017) – Defended client against claims of patent infringement for technology covering mechanical headlights. Case dismissed following a stay and successful validity challenge before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
• Inline Plastics Corp. v. Easypak, LLC DMA-4-11-cv-11470 (D. Mass 2015) – Joined case after Markman and obtained dismissal of invalidity counterclaims and entry of judgment on infringement to allow for an expedited appeal. Case settled on favorable terms following remand.
• Dallakian v. IPG Photonics, 14-cv-11863-TSH (D. Mass.) - Successfully defended against claims for correction of inventorship and trade secret misappropriation.
• Mitsubishi Chemical Corp. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., 718 F. Supp. 2d 382 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) aff’d, 435 Fed. Appx. 927 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 2, 2011): Enforced client’s patent covering a high concentration formulation of an anticoagulant under the Hatch-Waxman Act. The patent was found valid and defendant’s ANDA approval was enjoined.
• Accentra Inc. v. Staples, Inc., 851 F. Supp. 2d 1205 (C.D. Cal. 2011), rev’d in part by Accentra Inc. v. Staples, Inc., No. 2012-1237 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 4, 2013). – Defended against claims of patent infringement brought by a former business partner and competitor.  Client settled on favorable terms following determination that two of three patents were either not infringed or invalid.
• 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.

Patent Office Proceedings

• Eyenovia, Inc. v. Sydnexis, Inc., IPR2022-00384, -00414, 00415 – Represent pharmaceutical client challenging patent claims directed to low-dose ophthalmic compositions and method of using the same (pending)
• Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al v. Nanoco Technologies, Ltd., IPR 2021-00182, -00183, -00184, -00185, and -00186 - Represented patent owner and obtained decisions upholding all claims as valid.
• Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Quest Diagnostics Investments LLC, IPR2019-00738, IPR2019-01425, IPR2019-01517, IPR2019-01618 - Represented diagnostic company patent owner in multiple proceedings involving methods of detecting metabolites.
• Jennewein Biotechnologie GmbH v. Glycosyn LLC, PGR2019-00023 - Represented biotechnology patent owner and obtained decision denying institution of PGR.
• Acclarent, Inc. et al v. Ford Albritton, IV, IPR2017-00498 (Jul. 9, 2018) - Represented medical device company in decision involving guide catheter apparatus.
• SL Corporation v. Adaptive Headlamp Technologies, Inc., IPR2016-00193 and IPR2016-01368 (Mar. 15, 2017) – Represented automotive client challenging patent claims asserted in district court resulting in a decision finding all claims unpatentable.
• Indivior Inc. v. Rhodes Pharmaceuticals L.P., IPR2018-00795 (Oct. 4, 2018) - Decision involving methods of opioid substitution therapy using buprenorphine sublingual film.
• Green Cross Corp. v. Shire Human Genetic Therapies, Inc., IPR2016-00258 (Mar. 22, 2017) - Decision involving actual reduction to practice of recombinant protein.
• Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd., IPR2015-01069, (Oct. 20, 2015) - Represented pharmaceutical company patent owner and obtained decision denying institution of IPR.
• Sawai USA, Inc., et al. v. Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd., IPR2015-01647, (Feb. 4, 2016): Represented pharmaceutical company patent owner and obtained decision denying institution of IPR.
• Sawai USA, Inc., et al. v. Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd., IPR2015-01648, Paper No. 9 (Feb. 4, 2016): Represented pharmaceutical company patent owner and obtained decision denying institution of IPR.
• Ace Bed Co., Ltd. v. Sealy Technology LLC, IPR2014-01119, Paper No. 12, (Nov. 24, 2015): Represented petitioner in proceeding involving bed springs and all claims were determined to be unpatentable.
• Saturn Biomedical Systems, Incorporated v. Aircraft Medical Limited, Inter Partes Reexamination No. 95/000,161 – Counsel to district court defendant medical device company and third-party requester in a complex inter partes reexamination involving nearly 300 claims related to video laryngoscopy. All but one claim that did not pose a risk of infringement were determined to be unpatentable.

Appellate

• Copan Italia S.p.A. v. Puritan Medical Products Company LLC, 22-1943 (Fed. Cir.) - Represent Copan in defendants’ appeal from decision denying immunity from liability under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) (pending).
• Copan Italia S.p.A. v. ITC, 23-1668 (Fed. Cir.) - Represent Copan in appeal from ITC decision (pending).
• Copan Italia S.p.A. v. Puritan Medical Products Co. LLC, No. 22-7085 (D.C. Cir. 2022) - Represented Copan in defendants’ appeal from decision denying immunity from liability under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act). Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
• Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Nanoco Technologies Ltd., Nos. 22-1847, -1848, -1849, -1850, -1851 (Fed. Cir. 2022) - Represented Nanoco in appeal from patent office decisions finding all challenged claims valid. Dismissed pursuant as part of $150M settlement for client.
• Acclarent, Inc. v. Albritton, No. 18-2377 (Fed. Cir. 2019) - Represented medical device company in appeal from patent office decision involving guide catheter apparatus.
• Kowa Company, Ltd., et al. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, No. 2018-1051 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 10, 2018): Represented pharmaceutical company following a successful Hatch-Waxman patent infringement. Obtained affirmance of district court judgment upholding client’s patents over anticipation, obviousness, and obviousness-type double patenting challenges.
• Green Cross Corporation v. Shire Human Genetic Therapies, Inc., No. 17-2071 (Fed. Cir, 2018) – Represented client on appeal of IPR proceeding. Successfully defeated motion to dismiss for lack of standing prior to favorable settlement and dismissal.
• Inline Plastics Corp. v. EasyPak, LLC, 799 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2015) – Represented Inline against a primary competitor and successfully achieved reversal and remand on case-dispositive claim construction.
• Accentra Inc. v. Staples, Inc., No. 2012-1237 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 4, 2013) – Represented Staples against competitor on appeal. Obtained reversal on two out of three patent issues and affirmance of summary judgment of no trademark infringement. Client settled on very favorable terms following remand to district court.
• Rubin v. The General Hospital Corporation, No. 2011-1439 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 28, 2013) – Represented the General Hospital Corporation (MGH) on appeal following a successful defense against plaintiff’s inventorship challenge at the district court. Judgment affirmed.
• SpendingMoney LLC v. American Express Co., No. 2012-1481 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 12, 2013) - Represented the client on appeal following a successful summary judgment determination of noninfringement. Judgment affirmed.
• MeadWestvaco v. Rexam, Appeal, 731 F.3d 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2013) - Represented MeadWestvaco on appeal of issues including claim construction, summary judgment determinations, and bench finding of infringement.
• Mitsubishi Chem. Co. v. Barr Labs., Inc., 435 Fed. Appx. 927 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 2, 2011) - Represented pharmaceutical company following a successful Hatch-Waxman patent infringement action at the district court. Judgment affirmed.

International Trade Commission

• Certain Flocked Swabs, Products Containing Flocked Swabs, And Methods of Using Same (337-TA-1279) - Representing Copan Italia and Copan Industries as complainants in the International Trade Commission, asserting patent infringement claims against global competitors in a case involving the use of flocking technology (common in the textile industry) in the production of biological specimen collection swabs. Evidentiary hearing is scheduled for June 2022.
• Certain Human Milk Oligosaccharides and Methods of Producing the Same (337-TA-1120) – Represented Glycosyn LLC as complainant before the ITC against respondent Jennewein Biotechnologies GmbH, a large global competitor. The complaint alleged unlawful and unauthorized importation and production and/or manufacture of 2'-fucosyllactose oligosaccharides that directly infringe one or more claims of Glycosyn's U.S. Patent No. 9,453,230. Following oral hearing in May 2019, the Administrative Law Judge issued an Initial Determination finding that Jennewein had infringed claims of Glycosyn’s patent and recommended that a limited exclusion order issue, including a certification provision with heightened requirement.