Adam is an experienced IP litigator who primarily serves pharmaceutical, medical, high tech, and defense industry clients. He handles patent, trade secret and other intellectual property matters for innovators and investors. 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 electronics. 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 on pharmaceutical assets, including reviewing and assessing litigation, regulatory, and competitive strategies.
Adam is an experienced IP litigator who primarily serves pharmaceutical, medical, high tech, and defense industry clients. He handles patent, trade secret and other intellectual property matters for innovators and investors. 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 electronics. 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
- 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
- Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc. v. GL Leading, Inc., 1:19-cv-02648 (N.D. Ill.) – Lead counsel to several divisions of Philips Healthcare 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 default judgement as a sanction against China-based parent companies after successfully defeating serial motions to dismiss and compelling discovery over China State Secrets and Data Protection Law objections. In early 2023, obtained permanent injunction with no geographic or temporal limitation, in addition to an award of attorneys’ fees against Chinese competitors. Obtained 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.
- 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.
viewpoints
No Pleading, No Problem: Court Denies Motion to Dismiss and Bifurcates Willful Infringement Determination, in Absence of Affirmative Willful Infringement Claim
November 13, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski, Courtney Herndon
Recently in Nike, Inc. v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc., 2:17-cv-08509 (C.D. Cal.) (October 26, 2020), the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted-in-part and denied-in-part Defendant, Skechers U.S.A., Inc.’s (“Skechers”), motion to limit Plaintiff, Nike, Inc.’s (“Nike”), claim seeking attorney’s fees related to the infringement of its eight asserted design patents, resulting in the bifurcation of the willfulness issue from the trial on the merits.
Read more
In Hatch-Waxman litigation, Federal Circuit restricts venue under the TC Heartland to districts relating to ANDA filings
November 12, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski, Nana Liu
On November 5, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Valeant Pharmaceuticals N. Am. LLC v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 19-2402, resolved a split among district courts over what constitutes “acts of infringement” sufficient to support venue in the context of a Hatch-Waxman litigation.
Read more
Fact-Specific Inquiry: Deciding Between Trade Secret and Patent Protection
September 15, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington
Innovations that are eligible for patent protection are often vital to a company’s revenue stream and profitability, but in some cases, opting for trade secret protection is a better strategic choice.
Read more
Rules of Engagement: Minimizing Trade Secret Disputes when Hiring Rival Employees
September 10, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington
An ethical corporate culture and clear expectations during the hiring process can help companies curtail trade secret disputes when hiring employees from rival companies.
Read more
Playing Fair: Protect Trade Secrets from Business Partners
September 8, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington
Companies can minimize trade secret theft by business partners by instituting non-disclosure agreements before sharing trade secrets and establishing general confidentiality agreements with business partners.
Read more
Strategic Considerations at the Intersection of Patent and Trade Secret Protection
September 8, 2020 | Video | By Adam Samansky
In the fourth installment of our video series on trade secret litigation, Adam Samansky discusses the importance of taking a holistic approach to intellectual property, looking at both patent and trade secret protection where appropriate.
Read more
Workplace Confidential: Preventing Former Employees from Using Your Trade Secrets
August 24, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington
By proactively protecting trade secrets and using litigation strategically, companies can minimize trade secret misappropriation by former employees.
Read more
Danger on the Horizon: Detecting Early Signs of Trade Secret Theft by Competitors
August 20, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington
Companies can quickly detect trade secret theft by planting an unneeded feature or part that would be included in a copycat item and continually monitoring competitors’ new products.
Read more
Keeping (Trade) Secrets Amid a Reduction in Force
August 17, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Nicholas Armington
Companies can lower the risk of trade secret theft amid a reduction in force by limiting and auditing the use of trade secrets and including confidentiality provisions in severance agreements.
Read more
District of Delaware Goes against Prior Decisions and Declines to Dismiss Willful Infringement Claims Despite Failure to Allege Egregious Infringing Conduct
August 12, 2020 | Blog | By Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo, Joe Rutkowski
On July 30, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, in APS Technology, Inc. v. Vertex Downhole, Inc. et al, No. 19-cv-01166, denied Vertex Downhole’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss APS’s patent infringement complaint.
Read more
News & Press
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.
Fifty-Nine Attorneys Recognized as 2023 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
October 12, 2023
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.
Mintz is pleased to announce that Member and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Division Michael Renaud and Members Matthew Galica, Frank Gerratana, Marguerite McConihe, Michael Newman, Adam Rizk, Adam Samansky, Daniel Weinger, and James Wodarski have been named to the 2023 IAM Strategy 300: The World’s Leading IP Strategists list.
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©.
BOSTON – Mintz is pleased to announce that it has become an official sponsor of the Pan-Mass Challenge (PMC).
Member Adam Samansky spoke to The Boston Business Journal about the FTC's proposal to ban noncompete agreements.
Why Cellect's Federal Circuit Case Is One To Watch
December 16, 2022
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.
Watching The DTSA Court Split On Inevitable Disclosure
October 18, 2022
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.
35 Mintz attorneys have been named Massachusetts Super Lawyers and 25 Mintz attorneys have been named Massachusetts Rising Stars for 2022.
As ANDA Suit Venue Options Shrink, Del., NJ Rule For Now
November 29, 2021
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.
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.
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.
The Estoppel Questions On The Minds Of Patent Challengers
September 9, 2019
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.
Victory on Appeal After Lengthy Litigation Over Cholesterol Inhibitor
December 14, 2018
Mintz Secures Full Patent Victory for Kowa Pharmaceuticals and Nissan Chemical in Lengthy Battle
September 22, 2017
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.
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 Triumphs for SL Corporation and Hyundai Motor America, Inc. Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
March 16, 2017
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.
Eighty-Four Mintz Attorneys Named 2016 Massachusetts Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
October 18, 2016
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.
Mintz Further Expands IP Practice with Eighteen Attorneys
January 09, 2015
Events & Speaking
Panelist
Panelist
Mar
21
2024
IP in the Digital Age: Trends and Transformations
Boston Bar Association IP Year In Review Conference
Speaker
Speaker
Speaker
Oct
14
2020
Trade Secret Threat Looms Due to Economic Downturn: Protecting and enforcing trade secrets in the COVID era
View the Webinar Recording
Speaker
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
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
Read less
Adam is an experienced IP litigator who primarily serves pharmaceutical, medical, high tech, and defense industry clients. He handles patent, trade secret and other intellectual property matters for innovators and investors. 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 electronics. 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 - 2024)
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)
Adam is an experienced IP litigator who primarily serves pharmaceutical, medical, high tech, and defense industry clients. He handles patent, trade secret and other intellectual property matters for innovators and investors. 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 electronics. 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 Patent Law Association
- Member, Federal Circuit Bar Association
- Member, American Chemical Society
Recent Insights
How Your Trade Secret Could Help to Defend Against Claims of Patent Infringement
February 1, 2024| Blog|
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.
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.
