• GlaxoSmithKline LLC, et al. v. Sandoz Inc. (U.S. District Court, District of Delaware). Representing plaintiff GlaxoSmithKline in a Hatch-Waxman patent infringement litigation involving GSK's corticosteroid nasal spray, Veramyst®, which is indicated for treatment of symptoms of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis in adults and children ≥ 2 years. Sandoz was the first filer seeking to launch a generic version of Veramyst®. The parties reached a settlement and the case was dismissed in September 2013.
    • Endo Pharmaceuticals v. Impax Laboratories, Actavis, Barr, Sandoz, Roxane and Watson (U.S. District Court, Districts of Delaware and New Jersey). Trial counsel for Endo in relation to six ANDAs filed against Endo’s branded oxymorphone extended release tablet, OPANA® ER .
    • Boston Scientific Corporation et al. v. Micro-Tech Endoscopy USA Inc. et al. (D. Del). Represented Boston Scientific in a patent infringement suit involving multiple patents relating to endoscopic hemostasis clips. Matter settled favorably.
    • Synthes v. Globus (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania). Lead counsel to Synthes in trade secret misappropriation case involving medical devices used in spine surgery. Settled after two weeks of jury trial where defendant paid Synthes US$13.5 million and agreed to non-solicitation of employees for one year.
    • Hearing Components v. Shure (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas). Lead counsel representing Hearing Components for its claim of infringement of three patents by Shure’s sound isolating earphones for MP3 players. Won US$4.6 million verdict after jury trial.
    • Boston Scientific v. ev3, Inc. and Boston Scientific v. Guidant (U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota). Lead counsel to Boston Scientific in separate patent litigations involving medical devices used in stenting procedures. Both cases settled.
    • SB Pharmco d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline v. Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania). Representing GlaxoSmithKline entities in ANDA litigation concerning heart medication.
    • ABB v. Schlumberger (U.S. District Court, District of Delaware). Lead trial counsel for ABB in patent litigation involving digital electricity meters. Won US$22 million verdict, including award of lost profits, after jury trial.
    • Crown Cork & Seal v. Anheuser Bush (U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin). Represented Crown in patent litigation involving new aluminum can lid technology. Case settled after successful appeal to Federal Circuit to overturn trial court’s claim construction in favor of Crown for its patents and affirming summary judgment of non-infringement of AB’s patents.
    • Pergo v. Faus (U.S. District Court, District of Georgia). Represented Pergo in patent litigation involving laminated flooring products. Settled.
    • Advanced Cardiovascular Systems v. Boston Scientific (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California). Represented Boston Scientific in multiple cases involving balloon angioplasty catheters. Cases settled.
    • Amp v. Berg (U.S. International Trade Commission). Represented Respondent Berg in ITC action resulting in favorable findings of non-infringement and inequitable conduct.
    • Molex v. Berg (U.S. District Court, District of Delaware). Represented Berg in patent litigation involving electrical connectors. Settled.
    • 3M v. Dentsply (U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin). Represented Dentsply in patent litigation involving dental products. Settled.
    • Harcros v. Brockhues (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania). Represented Harcros in patent litigation involving pigments for coloring concrete. Settled.
    • Procter & Gamble v. McNeil Consumer Products (U.S. District Court, District of Delaware). Represented Johnson & Johnson entity in patent litigation involving women’s healthcare products. Settled.
    • McNeil Consumer Products v. Kimberly Clark (U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey). Represented Johnson & Johnson entity in patent litigation involving women’s healthcare products. Settled.
    • IP Issues to Consider When Launching a New Product — NJCCA 9th Annual In-House Counsel Conference, Whippany, NJ (September 23, 2011)

      This program explored the various different types of intellectual property rights that can be used to protect new products, the types of rights conferred and their geographic reach, and best practices for minimizing risks of infringement of third party rights.
    • Taught a course in patent litigation at his law school alma mater, Villanova University School of Law
    • American Intellectual Property Law Association
    • Philadelphia Intellectual Property Law Association