Colin Underwood, a partner in the Litigation Department, focuses on complex commercial litigation, with an emphasis on antitrust and intellectual property. He serves on the firm's Diversity and Inclusion Oversight Committee, is co-chair of the firm's Technology Committee, and acts as Partner Co-Sponsor for the Cadwalader Asian Pacific American Attorney Resource Group.
Colin has extensive experience in representing clients in the pharmaceutical industry in all types of disputes, from patent infringement litigation to contract disputes. In 2013, he successfully represented a client in arbitration against claims arising from a joint development agreement, and advised another client in connection with similar claims which were resolved without the need for arbitration. He previously obtained a significant litigation victory for a small biotechnology client asserting breach of license claims against a major pharmaceutical manufacturer. He also successfully represented another biotechnology client in an international arbitration to resolve a licensing dispute, and litigated on behalf of a generic pharmaceutical company asserting antitrust claims against another generic manufacturer for having delayed its competitor's entry into the market.
Colin also has experience representing clients in the beverage industry, including the defense of a worldwide beverage company against claims that it had breached its bottling agreement with a major foreign bottling entity, and ongoing litigation concerning the corporate control and management of another large beverage company.
In the patent field, Colin has handled cases involving pharmaceutical formulations and methods as well as those in computer and technology fields. In 2007, Colin represented a major French cellular telephone company in litigation against the provider of network equipment that had failed, taking the telephone system out of service. More recently, he represented the men's professional tennis tour, ATP Tour, Inc., against antitrust claims brought by the owners of the Hamburg tennis tournament. After a two-week jury trial, the ATP prevailed on all counts.
Colin also advises clients on antitrust compliance issues and in connection with merger analyses, and has represented clients before the Department of Justice Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission.
Among his reported cases are:
Move v. REAL, 709 F.3d 1117 (Fed. Cir. 2013)
Deutscher Tennis Bund v. ATP Tour, Inc., 610 F.3d (3d Cir. 2010)
Compania Embotelladora de Pacifico, S.A. v. Pepsi Cola Co., 650 F.Supp.2d 314 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Emisphere Technologies, Inc., 408 F. Supp. 2d 668 (S.D. Ind. 2006)
Geneva Pharmaceuticals Tech. Corp. v. Barr Labs, Inc., 386 F.2d 485 (2d Cir. 2004)
He is a member of the New York State Bar Association (Intellectual Property Law Section, International Law and Practice Section), and the American Bar Association (Antitrust Section, Intellectual Property Section, Litigation Section, Committee on Computer Litigation, Committee on Antitrust Litigation).
Colin earned his B.S. in Mathematics and Computer Science with highest distinction and Phi Beta Kappa, as well as his M.S. in Computer Science, from the University of Michigan. He received his J.D. from Yale Law School, where he served as Production Editor of the Yale Law Journal. Following law school Colin was a clerk for the Hon. Robert W. Sweet of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
He is admitted to practice in the State of New York and before the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York, the Eastern District of Michigan, and the Eastern District of Wisconsin; and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the District of Columbia Circuit, and the First, Second, Third and Fifth Circuits.
News & Resources
• Cadwalader Represents Goodyear in Dissolution with SRI Resolving Two-Year Dispute Oct 02, 2015
• Cadwalader Recognized with Multiple Legal Aid Society Awards Oct 25, 2013
• Breaking Symmetry: Do Recent Circuit Decisions Threaten the Core Balance Struck by Congress in Enacting the Hatch-Waxman Act? Sep 12, 2002
U.S. Federal Courts
• Supreme Court, in FTC v. Actavis, Rejects the “Scope of the Patent” Test, Holding that Antitrust Law's “Rule of Reason” Analysis Can Pierce the Shield of Patent Rights Jul 09, 2013
Hon. Robert W. Sweet
U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York