David is a Partner in the Firm's Intellectual Property Litigation Group in Edwards Wildman's Boston office. David has extensive experience in complex patent litigation. He has defended major pharmaceutical companies in Hatch-Waxman litigations involving pharmaceutical compounds, formulations and methods of use. David's patent litigation practice covers a wide variety of technologies ranging from complex pharmaceuticals and electronics to simple mechanical devices like staplers and beverage crates. In addition to his patent litigation experience, David has advised clients regarding patent validity and potential infringement, and assisted clients to design around existing patents. David has also represented clients in arbitration and mediation proceedings.
David is a registered patent attorney licensed to practice and argue before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Notable Experience
· Represented pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman litigation regarding formulation of blood thinner used to treat heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). The validity of the patent was upheld after a lengthy bench trial. Mitsubishi Chemical Corp. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., Case No. 1:07-CV-11614 (JGK).
· Represented pharmaceutical company in Hatch-Waxman in several litigations in which client asserted that multiple defendants infringed seven patents directed to compositions and methods of using a popular oral anti-diabetic. Cases settled on favorable terms. See, e.g., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Case No. 1:09-CV-04465 (DLC).
· Managed a team of attorneys in formulating infringement and validity positions for 29 patents covering various aspects of photocopier technology in a "rocket docket" case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The case, involving more than 200 accused products, settled on favorable terms. Sharp v. Xerox, Case No. 02-06CV-187.
· Represented an ultracapacitor manufacturer in two co-pending patent infringement suits involving five patents. The case settled on favorable terms in April 2008, after the Court's Markman ruling, and after successfully opposing summary judgment. Maxwell v. NessCap, Case No. 3:06-cv-02311; NessCap v. Maxwell, 3:07-cv-00704.
· Member of team that successfully defended the validity of compound patent directed to popular oral anti-diabetic. Takeda Chem. Indus., Ltd. v. Mylan Labs. Inc., Case No. 03-CV-8253 (DLC).
· Obtained summary judgment of invalidity and unenforceability in patent infringement litigation on behalf of major retailer. After summary judgment, obtained costs and a portion of clients' attorney's fees from Plaintiff. Dbest Products, Inc. v. Staples, Inc., Case No. 1:07-VC-04895 (ODW).
· Obtained summary judgment that client did not infringe Plaintiffs' design patent and alleged trade dress. Competitive Edge, Inc. v. Staples, Inc., Case No. 1:08-VC-00956 (VMK).
· David has briefed and argued case dispositive motions and Markman hearings; deposed inventors, experts, and corporate representatives; managed discovery from the filing of a complaint through trial; and worked with industry and academic experts to develop and present infringement and validity analyses.
· David is comfortable working with a broad range of technologies and products. He has represented clients in patent infringement litigation and provided non-infringement and validity opinions on technology including: multiple major pharmaceuticals, blood screens, immunoassays, mass spectrometers, alloys, automotive parts, hand tools, lithographic developers, and bacteria detection media.
Recent Speaking Engagements and Publications
· "The End Of Multidefendant Patent Litigation?," co-author, Law360, October 4, 2011.
News & Publications
October 7, 2011, In IP Law360, David Cotta and Peter Cuomo Ask if We Are Seeing the End of Multidefendant Patent Litigation
December 17, 2008, Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge Announces Six New Partners and Three New Counsel