logo

Follow/Share
  • About
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Diversity
  • Alumni
  • English
    • 普通話

Contacts

Joseph M. Bennett-Paris, Ph.D.

Member
P (404) 572-2024

Thomas Langer

Member
P (212) 297-2662

  • People
    • A
    • B
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • H
    • I
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • P
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • T
    • U
    • V
    • W
    • X
    • Y
    • Z
    • |
    • View all people



  • Industries
    • Energy & Utilities
    • Food & Beverage
    • Gaming
    • Health Care & Life Sciences
    • Insurance
    • Media, Entertainment & Sports
    • Real Estate & Construction
    • Technology
    • Transportation & Logistics
    • Venture Capital
  • Practice Areas
      • Antitrust & Trade Regulation
      • Bankruptcy, Insolvency & Restructuring
      • China Practice
      • Corporate
      • Emerging Business & Venture Capital
      • Energy, Environmental & Public Utilities
      • Health Care
      • International
      • Mergers & Acquisitions
      • Private Client Services
      • Public & Project Finance
      • Securities
      • Tax
      • Transportation & Logistics
      Business/Corporate
      • Antitrust & Trade Regulation
      • Aviation
      • Consumer Protection & Privacy
      • Cozen O'Connor Public Strategies - Government Relations
      • Energy, Environmental & Public Utilities
      • Health Care
      • Privacy & Data Security
      • Transportation & Logistics
      Government & Regulatory
      • Bad Faith
      • Cyber/Technology
      • Insurance Corporate & Regulatory
      • Insurance Coverage & Claims Litigation
      • Professional Liability Insurance Coverage
      • Reinsurance
      • Subrogation & Recovery
      Insurance
      • Biologics/Biosimilars
      • Domains
      • e-commerce
      • Entertainment Law
      • Franchising
      • Hatch-Waxman Litigation
      • Intellectual Property Litigation
      • Licensing & Transfer
      • Patents
      • Right of Privacy & Right of Publicity
      • Trade Secrets & Unfair Competition
      • Trademark & Copyright
      Intellectual Property
      • Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation
      • Employment Litigation
      • Immigration
      • Labor Relations & Disputes
      • Trade Secrets & Unfair Competition
      Labor & Employment
      • Antitrust Litigation & Investigations
      • Appellate
      • Aviation
      • Bankruptcy, Insolvency & Restructuring
      • Complex Litigation
      • Construction
      • Cyber/Technology
      • Electronic Discovery
      • Energy, Environmental & Public Utilities
      • Family Law
      • Franchise Disputes
      • Health Care
      • Insurance Coverage & Claims Litigation
      • Intellectual Property Litigation
      • Internal Investigations & Criminal Defense
      • Products Liability
      • Professional Liability
      • Real Estate Litigation
      • Securities Litigation & Enforcement
      • Self-insured Recovery
      • Transportation & Logistics Litigation
      Litigation
      • Brownfields Development
      • Distressed Real Estate
      • Eminent Domain
      • Office/Retail/Industrial Leasing & Development
      • Real Estate Finance
      • Real Estate Litigation
      • Zoning, Land Use & Development
      Real Estate
      • Subrogation & Recovery
    • Experience
      • Client Stories
      • Experience
    • Offices
      • Atlanta
      • New York
      • Charlotte
      • Philadelphia
      • Cherry Hill
      • San Diego
      • Chicago
      • Seattle
      • Dallas
      • Toronto
      • Denver
      • Washington, D.C.
      • Harrisburg
      • West Conshohocken
      • Houston
      • West Palm Beach
      • London
      • Wilkes-Barre
      • Los Angeles
      • Wilmington
      • Miami
    • News & Resources
      • Blogs
      • News & Resources
      • Media Resources
      • Publications
    • OVERVIEW
    • EXPERIENCE
    • PEOPLE
    • PUBLICATIONS
    • EVENTS
    • NEWS

      Patents

      It is a simple fact that businesses must seek patent protection for the products, equipment, and methods that distinguish them from competitors in the marketplace. It is also a fact that the patent system is incredibly challenging to navigate because it is complex and ever changing. The Patent Reform Act of 2011, for example, is expected to redefine such fundamental concepts as ownership, patentability, prior art, and enforceability. In order to manage the patent process efficiently and emerge with defensible patents in hand, companies absolutely require the assistance of sophisticated patent counsel.

      Cozen O’Connor’s patent attorneys practice at the cutting edge of law and science. They routinely handle every phase of the patent process, from initial patentability analysis and prior art searches, to documentation and disclosure, to prosecution, protection, licensing, and enforcement. Cozen O’Connor has also established reciprocal relationships with foreign firms in all jurisdictions in order to provide clients comprehensive patent protection. With the globalization of technology and commerce, a sophisticated IP practice must have international patent capabilities.

      We represent a range of companies, from small start-ups to multinational blue chips, that do business in many sectors, including industrial science, engineering, computer software, finance, education, manufacturing, telecommunications, managed services, retail, arts, and sports. Cozen O’Connor is also one of the only large law firms in the country with a team of patent attorneys dedicated to serving the generic pharmaceutical and biologics industries.

      The concepts at issue in most patent matters are highly technical. It is essential that patent counsel have the requisite scientific training to fully comprehend the underlying IP at issue. In addition, they must be able to communicate with clients at a sophisticated level and persuasively defend clients’ patent rights. More than half of our team holds advanced degrees in the natural sciences and nearly all members have experience as research scientists in industry or academia. Our attorneys have worked at pharmaceutical companies and leading research universities, and many have published work in top scientific journals.

      In additional to technical ability, Cozen O’Connor attorneys have the business acumen to counsel clients on building and managing their patent portfolio. Patents are assets that can bestow tremendous competitive advantage, but only if they are protected and leveraged wisely. We develop a deep understanding of each client’s business model and design patent strategies that complement each client’s financial position and long-term aspirations. A good patent lawyer does not simply draft documents and perform due diligence. A good patent lawyer helps determine what assets to protect and how to maximize each asset’s value.

       

      SERVICE AREAS

      • Prosecute patent applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and abroad
      • Develop strategies to maximize patent protection
      • Analyze patentability of inventions not yet protected
      • Assist with searches of prior art and survey competitors’ patent activities
      • Perform freedom-to-operate, clearance, validity, due diligence, and infringement studies
      • Represent clients in reissue, reexamination, interference, opposition, and derivation proceedings
      • Counsel clients about leveraging domestic and international patent rights
      • Provide transactional advice on acquisitions, joint ventures, and transfer and licensing agreements
      • Assert or defend patents with respect to infringement claims or other disputes

      Experience

      Represented Metso Minerals, Inc., as plaintiff for patent infringement against Powerscreen Int’l. and Terex Corporation on a patent covering mobile screeners. The jury found, after a 7 week trial, that the patent was valid, enforceable and willfully infringed, and awarded damages of $15.8 million. The court doubled the damages to $31.6 million and issued a permanent injunction.


      Prior to trial, represented Sun Pharma as a defendant for infringement, by the FDA filing of a generic drug application, of a patent covering the drug pantoprazole. The preliminary injunction was denied.


      Represented Metso Paper, Inc., as plaintiff for patent infringement against Enerquin Air on a patent covering a blow box used on machines for making paper. After a favorable court decision construing the claims of the patent, the defendant settled on favorable terms.


      Served as lead trial counsel for Wilmington Trust Company in largest multidistrict patent litigation suit in defense of claims of patent infringement of RAKTL concerning call processing patents.


      Represented Sandoz Inc. in King and Mutual v. Sandoz, 08-5974 (D.N.J.), in which Sandoz was alleged to infringe a patent concerning the muscle relaxant Skelaxin®. After an eight-day jury trial, the jury found the patent both invalid and not infringed. Both King and Mutual appealed, but then withdrew their appeal after Sandoz filed its appellate brief.


      In Aventis v. Dr. Reddy’s, three of Dr. Reddy’s generic fexofenadine products were alleged to infringe a total of seven patents, four patents directed to fexofenadine formulations and three patents directed to methods of treatment using fexofenadine. After a bench trial and with several summary judgment motions filed by Dr. Reddy’s pending, the plaintiff capitulated, providing Dr. Reddy’s with a no-strings-attached covenant not to sue with respect to all asserted patents.


      Designed and implemented the litigation strategy as counsel for the second generic challenger in a patent infringement case involving patentee's drug, TAMBACOR©, a heart medication with sales exceeding $150 million. Summary judgment of noninfringement was obtained in less than six months after patentee filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. This judgment began tolling the 180-day exclusivity period of the first generic challenger, who was still facing trial and not yet on the market. The Federal Circuit subsequently affirmed the decision and, in doing so, expedited the client's market entry by many years. The Federal Circuit's decision resulted in a leading opinion on the proper application of the Hatch-Waxman Act, Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Barr Labs.


      Designed and implemented the litigation strategy as lead counsel for the declaratory-judgment plaintiff, a generic drug maker, in a patent infringement case involving Sanofi-Aventis’ drug RILUTEK©, before the Honorable Judge Farnan in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. A preemptory declaratory judgment attack precluded patentee from relying on the statutory 30-month stay on approval, resulting in approval of the generic alternative only six months after the ANDA was filed. Impax Labs., Inc. v. Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.


      Defended Chi Mei Optoelectronics in patent infringement litigation involving plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) processes used to make TFT-LCDs. Jury trial on liability found no willfulness and awarded plaintiff less than 5 percent of requested damages. Plasma Physics v. Chi Mei Optoelectronics Display Corp., C.A. No. 08-1628 (E.D.N.Y).


      Defended InnoLux Display Corp. in patent infringement litigation involving plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) processes used to make TFT-LCDs. Case settled on terms the client found favorable. (E.D.N.Y.).


      Represented Wockhardt in ANDA litigation regarding LUNESTA®, the active ingredient of which is eszopiclone. Settled prior to trial on terms the client found favorable.


      Represented Vonage Inc. in defense of a patent case in a jury trial in federal court in Kansas.


      Represent relator in qui tam action involving patent false marking. Slack v. Bon Aqua International, (M.D.N.C.).


      Patent infringement action representing defendant Chi-Mei Optoelectronics (CMO) relating to modules for monitor and television displays. Received summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of CMO.


      Represented Signalization Ver-Mac in declaratory judgment patent infringement relating to smart work zones on highways. Settled the case on terms the client found favorable after summary judgment motions were filed.


      Represented Vonage Holdings in a at jury trial of a patent infringement action relating to Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP). Settled the case on terms the client found favorable following trial.


      Represented NuVox in patent infringement action relating to Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP). Settled the case on terms the client found favorable following substantial discovery.


      Represented Peter Kiewit & Sons in patent infringement relating to fiber optic cable communications systems.Settled the case on terms the client found favorable following substantial discovery.


      Represented Chi Mei Optoelectronics in patent infringement action relating to modules for monitor and television displays.


      Represented CardSoft in a patent infringement action relating to point-of-sale devices. Granted Jury award in excess of $15.3 million.


      Represented relator in qui tam action involving patent false marking.


      Represented Chi-Mei Optoelectronics in a jury trial against a plaintiff who had received 42 licenses totaling $180-plus million in license royalties. Non-infringement found on 1 of 3 patents, reducing potential $900 million damages award to $10 million.


      Represented Signalization VerMac in declaratory judgment patent infringement action relating to solar tilt and rotate features of roadside message boards. Settled the case on terms the client found favorable after discovery.


      Defended Bel Fuse in a patent infringement case on integrated modular connectors which was favorably settled.


      Represented Sultan Dental as accused infringer of dental fluoride foam patent. The patent was held invalid after jury trial.


      Represented a German-based biotech company in a patent infringement action regarding a method for synthesizing nucleic acids.


      Patent infringement action regarding Apotex's ANDA to make a generic version of Sanofi-Aventis' anti-cancer product TAXOTERE®, the active ingredient of which is docetaxel. Following a two-week trial, obtained an order for Apotex striking down the patents-in-issue as invalid and unenforceable due to Sanofi-Adventis' inequitable conduct in procuring the patents.


      Represented Signalization Ver-Mac, in declaratory judgment patent infringement action relating to solar tilt and rotate features of roadside message boards. Settled the case on terms the client found favorable after discovery.


      Represented Vonage Holdings in a patent infringement action relating to Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP). Settled the case on terms the client found favorable following substantial discovery.


      Represented Lockheed Martin Corp. in opposing an effort by Zoltek Corp. to substitute it as a defendant in a patent-infringement action Zoltek had originally brought against the United States stemming from the U.S.'s alleged use of Zoltek's patent in the manufacture of the F-22 fighter plane. Obtained a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit allowing it to seek an interlocutory appeal of a Court of Federal Claim's decision that Lockheed was not protected by government-contractor immunity pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1498. Subsequent en banc Federal Circuit reversed trial court ruling thereby dismissing Lockheed Martin as a party.


      Represented defendant Wal-Mart Inc. on appeal to the Federal Circuit. Settled the case on terms the client found favorable just prior to oral argument.


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Medicis' acne product SOLODYN® (minocycline hydrochloride).


      Lead counsel for Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Endo's pain product OPANA® ER (oxymorphone hydrochloride).


      Represented Apotex Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Apotex's ANDA to make a generic version of Wyeth's anti-depressant product EFFEXOR XR® (venlafaxine hydrochloride). Settled on favorable terms during trial.


      Represented Apotex Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Apotex's ANDA to make a generic version of Sanofi-Aventis' anticancer product TAXOTERE®, the active ingredient of which is docetaxel. Following a two-week trial, obtained an order for Apotex striking down the patents-in-issue as invalid as obvious and unenforceable due to Sanofi-Aventis' inequitable conduct in procuring the patents. Successfully argued on appeal with the Federal Circuit affirming trial court decision (April 2012). Of import is that inequitable conduct defense remains viable in ANDA litigations because of this ruling.


      Handled a patent infringement action regarding Apotex's ANDA to make a generic version of Pfizer's migraine product Relpax®, the active ingredient of which is eletriptan hydrobromide.


      Represented Sandoz Inc. in a patent infringement action regarding Eon/Sandoz's abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) to make a generic version of Pfizer’s anti-seizure product Neurontin®, the active ingredient of which is gabapentin.


      Handled a patent infringement action regarding Schwarz Pharma’s ANDA to make a generic version of Braintree Labs’ constipation product Miralax®, the active ingredient of which is polyethylene glycol. During discovery, Braintree dismissed its infringement complaint, waiving the remaining portion of the 30 month stay on FDA approval of Schwarz Pharma’s product.


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Allergan's glaucoma drops COMBIGAN® (brimonidine tartrate/timolol maleate.)


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Alcon's eye allergy product PANTANOL® (olopatadine hydrochloride).


      Represented Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Merck's anti-nausea product EMEND® (aprepitant).


      Designed and implemented the litigation strategy as lead counsel for defendant, a Taiwanese semiconductor manufacturer, in a patent infringement case involving DC/AC power inverters for LCD panels in portable electronic devices. The defense resulted in a judgment as a matter of law on the issues of direct and contributory infringement and plaintiff's abandonment of a $120 million-plus damage claim (jury finding of inducement was reversed on appeal).


      Represented Chimei InnoLux Corporation, f/k/a InnoLux Display Corporation, in a patent infringement case involving brightness-enhancing films used in LCD devices. Plaintiff dismissed its case against our client, with prejudice, after the special master indicated he would recommend granting defendant's motion for summary judgment.


      Represented our client in a patent infringement action regarding Actavis' ANDA to make a generic version of King's pain product AVINZA®, the active ingredient of which is morphine sulfate.


      Represented our client, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Mylan's ANDA to make a generic version of Pfizer's cardiovascular product CADUET®, the active ingredients of which are atorvastatin calcium and amlodipine besylate. Settled prior to trial.


      Represented Apotex Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Apotex's ANDA to make a generic version of Procter's osteoporosis product ACTONEL® (risedronate).


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Abbott’s ZEMPLAR® (paricalcitol).


      Represented Apotex Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Apotex’s ANDA to make a generic version of LYSTEDA (tranexamic acid). Matter pending.


      Represented Apotex Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Apotex’s ANDA to make a generic version of ACULAR LS® (0.4% ketorolac tromethamine). Matter pending.


      Represented Apotex Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Apotex’s ANDA to make a generic version of PRISTIQ® (desvenlafaxine). Matter pending.


      Represented Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Shire’s ADHD product INTUNIV® (guanfacine hydrochloride). Matter pending.


      Represented Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz’s ANDA to make a generic version of Roche’s VALCYTE® (valganciclovir hydrochloride). Matter pending.


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in patent infringement action regarding Sandoz’s ANDA to make a generic version of Helsinn’s anti-nausea product ALOXI® (palonosetron hydrochloride injection). Matter pending.


      Represented our client in a patent infringement action regarding InnoPharma’s ANDA to make a generic version of Spectrum’s FUSILEV® (levoleucovorin). Matter pending.


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz’s ANDA to make a generic version of Abbott’s cholesterol medication TRILIPIX® (fenofibric acid). Matter pending.


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz’s ANDA to make a generic version of Abbott’s cholesterol product NIASPAN® (niacin). Matter pending.


      Represented our client, Sandoz Inc., in a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Alcon's eye allergy product PATANOL® (olopatadine hydrochloride).


      Represented client CardSoft in patent infringement action against multiple defendants who manufactured and sold infringing electronic point-of-sale ("ePOS") terminals using “swipe-technology.” Successfully secured patent damages for client in excess of $15 million for CardSoft in jury trial against VeriFone Systems, Inc. and VeriFone, Inc. (VeriFone) and Hypercom Corp. (Hypercom).


      Lead counsel in damage phase of a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Pfizer’s seizure and neuropathic pain product, Neurontin®, the active ingredient of which is gabapentin.


      Handled a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Pfizer’s antifungal medication VFEND®, the active ingredient of which is voriconazole.


      Handled a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Pfizer’s antimuscarinic tablet Detrol and Detrol LA®, the active ingredient of which is tolterodine tartrate.


      Handled a patent infringement action regarding Sandoz's ANDA to make a generic version of Alcon's eye allergy product Pataday®, the active ingredient of which is olopatadine hydrochloride.


      Represented our client in a patent infringement action regarding Apotex’s ANDA to make a generic version of AVODART® (dutasteride). Matter pending.


      Attorneys

      Ian R. Blum Member New York (212) 297-2679
      Alphonso A. Collins Member New York (212) 297-2673
      Elizabeth Lai Featherman Member Philadelphia (215) 665-4603
      Louis M. Heidelberger Member New York (212) 883.2221
      Julia S. Kim Member New York (212) 883-4998
      Philip Y. Kouyoumdjian Member New York (212) 883-4900
      Thomas Langer Member New York (212) 297-2662
      Lance J. Lieberman Member New York (212) 297-2697
      Camille M. Miller Co-Chair, Intellectual Property Group Philadelphia (215) 665-7273
      Darren S. Mogil Associate New York (212) 883-4976
      Alan J. Morrison Member New York (212) 297-2696
      Marilyn Neiman Member New York (212) 883-4985
      Martin B. Pavane Vice Chair, Intellectual Property Group New York (212) 883-4994
      Thomas C. Pontani Ph.D. Member New York (212) 883-4989
      Martin G. Raskin Member New York (212) 883-4908
      Ian Scott Member New York (212) 908-1205
      Brandon N. Sklar Of Counsel New York (212) 883-2220
      Michael C. Stuart Member New York (212) 883-4992
      Kyle Vos Strache Associate Philadelphia (215) 665-2747
      Edward M. Weisz Member New York (212) 297-2660
      Carl B. Wischhusen Of Counsel New York (212) 883-4967

      Publications


      IP: Obamacare’s Constitutional Impact on Patents [InsideCounsel]

      April 30, 2013

      MORE


      IP: Compound patents take a hit in Delaware District Court [Inside Counsel]

      March 19, 2013

      MORE


      IP: 5 practice tips from the recent Rambus rulings [Inside Counsel]

      February 19, 2013

      MORE

      Events & Seminars

      American Conference Institute Paragraph IV Disputes New York, NY 05/07/2013
      Columbia University Bioethics Course New York, NY 04/24/2013
      8th Annual Corporate Intellectual Property Law Conference Chicago, IL 02/13/2013
      Prior Art, Obviousness, and the America Invents Act in 2012 New York, New York 06/04/2012
      Prior Art Obviousness and Obvious-Type Double Patenting: Legal Analysis and Practical Applications for Brand Names and Generics New York, NY 04/24/2012
      New Orange Book Strategies and Controversies -- Carve-Outs, Skinny Labeling and Use Codes: Understanding Their Role in Orange Book Listing Strategies and Life Cycle Management New York, NY 10/04/2011
      DELVACCA Presents: The Legal Hurdles of Building Brand Awareness Philadelphia, PA 03/24/2010

      In The News


      Andrew Nemiroff Quoted in Law360 Article on Recent Federal Alarm Patent Case

      April 23, 2013

      MORE


      Kyle Vos Strache Quoted in The Legal Intelligencer on the America Invents Act

      March 15, 2013

      MORE


      Michael Stuart quoted in Aggregates Manager Magazine

      February 16, 2012

      MORE

      Related Practice Areas

      Biologics/Biosimilars

      Domains

      e-commerce

      Entertainment Law

      Franchising

      Hatch-Waxman Litigation

      Intellectual Property

      Intellectual Property Litigation

      Licensing & Transfer

      Right of Privacy & Right of Publicity

      Trade Secrets & Unfair Competition

      Trademark & Copyright

      • Sitemap
      • Advanced Search
      • Disclaimer
      • Privacy Policy
      • Attorney Advertising