• Lead counsel representing San Rocco Therapeutics in a patent infringement case involving gene therapy and alleged damages in excess of $1 billion. San Rocco Therapeutics, LLC v. bluebird bio, Inc. et al., No.1:21-cv-1478-RGA (D. Del. 2021).
• Lead counsel representing San Rocco Therapeutics in a declaratory judgment action and unfair competition dispute involving gene therapy technology. San Rocco Therapeutics, LLC v. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center et al., No. 1:21-cv-08206 (S.D.N.Y. 2021).
• Lead and first chair counsel in achieving a successful award on behalf of the claimant in an arbitration proceeding involving licensed patents covering gene therapy treatments. Claimant San Rocco Therapeutics, LLC v. Respondents bluebird bio, Inc. et al., AAA Case No. 01-22-0003-6927.
• Lead and first chair counsel representing a global aviation company in a complex commercial litigation involving broadband and in-flight wireless connectivity.
• Lead counsel representing MSTM, LLC and M&M Mass Spec Consulting, LLC in patent infringement and misappropriation of trade secret actions related to ionization technologies for mass spectrometry. MSTM, LLC et al. v. Waters Corporation, Case 4:23-cv-40027-MRG (D. Mass); MSTM, LLC et al. v. AB Sciex, LLC, Case 1:23-cv-11121-MRG (D. Mass)
• Lead counsel arguing on behalf of Biogen before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals against the USPTO’s Office of Solicitor, appealing an inter partes review decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board involving the drug Rituxan® (rituximab). Biogen v. Iancu, No. 2019-1364 (Fed. Cir. 2020).
• Represented Eagle Pharmaceuticals in defense of patent infringement involving the drug Alimta® (pemetrexed) drug product, which generated more than $2 billion in annual revenue. Achieved a favorable settlement before the end of trial. Eli Lilly v. Eagle Pharmaceuticals, No. 17-1293-MSG (D. Del. 2019).
• Represented T-Mobile in defense of patent infringement in the Western District of Texas that resulted in a favorable settlement before the end of fact discovery. Castlemorton Wireless v. T-Mobile, No. 6:20cv00027-ADA (W.D. Tx 2020).
• Represented Current Lighting Solutions, LLC in a Section 337 proceedings before the U.S. International Trade Commission in defense of patent infringement involving Light Emitting Diode technology that resulted in a finding of non-infringement and no violation. Certain Light-Emitting Diode Products, Systems, and Components Thereof, ITC Inv. Nos. 337-TA-1163 and 1164.
• Reached a favorable settlement in representation of an American pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman ANDA patent litigation involving its Sprycel® brand kinase inhibitor products, which was generating more than $2 billion in yearly revenue at the time of settlement. The court adopted proposed constructions for all 15 terms in dispute. Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Apotex (D.N.J.).
• Represented the complainant in a Section 337 proceeding before the U.S. International Trade Commission in a patent infringement action involving Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) technology. Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices, Including Monitors, Televisions, and Modules, and Components Thereof, ITC Inv. Nos. 337-TA-741 and 749.
• Represented a medical device manufacturer in defense of patent infringement involving fiberoptic intra-aortic balloon catheters and pumps. Developed a pretrial strategy that resulted in a favorable settlement agreement shortly after serving invalidity contentions and before the start of fact discovery. Datascope v. Teleflex Inc. and Arrow (D.N.J).
• Represented a leading multinational technology corporation in a Section 337 proceeding before the U.S. International Trade Commission in a patent infringement action involving LTE and 3GPP technology, which resulted in a favorable settlement. Certain Wireless Communication Equipment and Articles Therein, ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-866
• Represented a British pharmaceutical company in patent infringement litigation involving its Paxil® antidepressant drug products, which resulted in a favorable settlement. GlaxoSmithKline v. Apotex (E.D. Pa.).
• Represented a U.S.-based pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman ANDA patent litigation involving its Clarinex® antihistamine drug products against 21 generic defendants. Obtained consent judgments with injunctions against all defendants, which protected over $2 billion in annual revenues. In Re: Desloratadine Patent Litigation (D.N.J.).

*Results may vary depending on your particular facts and circumstances.