Practice Areas & Industries: Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP

 





Group Profile Lawyers in this Group Offices Locations for this Group
 

Practice/Industry Group Overview

As technology plays a central role in the world’s economy, disputes of a bet-the-company magnitude relating to the ownership and exploitation of intellectual property have become commonplace. The most valuable asset of many businesses is the right to prevent competitors from using their intellectual property. Conversely, the magnitude of the payoff for a competitor's successful challenge to an IP owner's right to successfully exclude competition attracts frequent challenges to the enforceability of intellectual property rights.

Edwards Wildman, recognized as having a Tier 1 IP Litigation practice by the 2013 US News/Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms,” has broad experience in all types of disputes arising from intellectual property rights. Our clients have successfully challenged the rights of others to exclude them from competing in many business areas. We have similarly assisted our clients in preventing others from infringing their exclusive rights to exploit their intellectual property. We pride ourselves on representing clients in even the most significant litigation with common sense and with diligence.

The IP Litigation Practice Group is a combination of litigation lawyers who focus on intellectual property disputes and IP lawyers who practice in the litigation arena. In addition, we access the vast in-house technical expertise of our IP lawyers and technology specialists covering virtually every area of technology.

When intellectual property disputes affect our many pharmaceutical and biotechnology clients, we work closely with members of our firm’s Life Sciences Practice Group. We have significant experience serving as first-chair trial counsel involving Hatch-Waxman Act/ANDA disputes on behalf of branded pharmaceutical companies.

Enforcing and Challenging Patent Rights
Our lawyers represent clients in actions involving a variety of patent issues, both in enforcing and challenging patent claims. We serve as trial counsel in a wide range of patent actions, including:

  • Pharmaceuticals
  • Medical devices
  • Silicon chip manufacture
  • Data processing devices
  • Video and audio digital signal processing devices
  • Audio signal timbre and pitch devices
  • Electronics equipment used in television production
  • Sports equipment
  • Printing equipment
  • Mechanical sealing and packing devices, and
  • Chemical manufacturing processes

We are particularly proud of our victories in Mitsubishi Chem. v. Barr Labs., 718 F. Supp. 2d 382 (S.D.N.Y. 2010), aff'd, 2011 WL 3288394 (Fed. Cir. 2011), where we defeated anticipation and obviousness challenges to our client’s patent on a drug for treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and in Takeda v. Mylan, 417 F. Supp. 2d 341 (S.D.N.Y. 2006), aff'd, 492 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2007), where we defeated attacks by generic drug manufacturers against the validity and enforceability of our client’s patent on a popular oral antidiabetic agent.

For those clients who are not in traditional technological fields, we provide advice and representation regarding business methods patents. Our lawyers have successfully represented clients in interference actions before the USPTO, in injunction hearings and at trial in federal courts in many states. We are proud of our success record in patent appeals in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Trademark and Trade Dress Litigation
Trademark, service mark and trade dress issues arise in a variety of contexts, and we have broad experience in resolving those disputes. We have represented pharmaceutical companies, airlines, and manufacturers of surge suppressers, static mixers, clothing, costume jewelry, toys and games, wrist watches, and swim products in trademark, service mark and trade dress disputes, to name a few. This broad experience includes issues of counterfeiting, trademark/service mark infringement, trade dress infringement, infringement based on quality control issues under Adolph Coors, repackaging infringement cases under Prestonettes, and first sale doctrine matters. Recently, we protected the trade names of a well-known modeling agency and a large wholesaler of consumer products.

We are progressive and aggressive in pursuing protection for our clients in cyberspace. We have protected the domain names of our clients and represented them in the often confusing intersection of intellectual property law and cyberspace.

Copyright Disputes
Ranging from computer software and business forms to music, "knock off" jewelry, textiles and a recipe for peanut butter-flavored ice cream, our lawyers have noteworthy copyright experience covering a diverse range of materials. Our lawyers successfully protected ownership and authorship rights in the popular songs, "Girl Watcher" and "Why Do Fools Fall in Love."

Trade Secret and Unfair Competition Disputes
With experience in a wide array of industries including health care, metallurgical processing and engineering, optical fiber, electroplating, wireless and cellular communications, software and computer hardware, we frequently handle trade secret claims and claims based upon non-competition agreements in a variety of contexts. Our clients are both plaintiffs and defendants in trade secret claims involving manufacturing processes, customer databases, equipment design, and financial transactions. We have particular skills in the application of the "inevitable disclosure" doctrine and in business tort cases involving allegations of "diversion" and alleged unlawful "grey market" transactions that often include trademark and copyright allegations in connection with state law unfair competition claim.

Domain Names
Domain names are a significant area of focus for management of brands online. Edwards Wildman has been effective in pursuing protection for our clients and assisting them with issues arising in Cyberspace: helping clients choose, register, and protect Internet domain names; defending trademarks from infringement and misappropriation on the Internet; and addressing infringement accusations by third parties. Edwards Wildman is experienced in providing clients with effective strategic advice on enforcement and defense of rights through a range of methods, from UDRP proceedings to court litigation.


 
 
Articles Authored by Lawyers at this office:

Copyright Office Adopts Interim Rule Allowing Copyright Owners to Give Notice of Intent to Audit Statements of Account
Seth A. Davidson,Arthur H. Harding, December 26, 2013
Faced with a year-end deadline, the Copyright Office has adopted an “interim” procedural rule that is intended to preserve copyright owners’ ability to audit cable and DBS statements of account (SOA) dating back to the 2010/1 accounting period. Because of the last-minute nature of...

Aereo Supports Supreme Court Review of its Victory in the Second Circuit
Seth A. Davidson, December 17, 2013
In a development that surprised most observers, Aereo has filed a brief with the Supreme Court agreeing that the Court should hear the broadcast industry’s challenge to Aereo’s legality under the Copyright Act. Aereo’s action may make it more likely that the Court will take the...

Copyright Office Releases Revised Statement of Account Forms for 2013/2 Accounting Period, Approves Use of Filing Fee Addendum with TWC Excel SOA Template
Seth A. Davidson, December 17, 2013
The Copyright Office, which recently announced the establishment of a schedule of filing fees that must accompany the submission of each statement of account form submitted by a cable operator, has published updated versions of Forms SA1-2 and SA3 that require cable operators to include the...

Customs Agencies Trial New Anti-Infringement Database
Riecha Sharma, December 13, 2013
The European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy has taken another step forward in its efforts against IP infringement by allowing a small number of customs authorities to test its enforcement database ahead of its full launch in April 2014.

English Court Of Appeal Confirms That Follow-On Competition Damages Actions Can Include Conspiracy Elements in the Claim but Only ‘In Rare Cases’
Emma Kingston,Becket McGrath, December 11, 2013
A key question for anybody who is thinking about commencing a competition law damages action in the courts is the extent to which it is able to rely on a prior infringement decision by an enforcement authority as the basis for its claim. Specifically, is it able to rely on a decision as a binding...

Filing Fees Established for Cable and Satellite Copyright Compulsory License Forms
Seth A. Davidson,Arthur H. Harding,Ari Z. Moskowitz, December 05, 2013
On November 29, the Copyright Office published its final schedule of filing fees for cable and satellite semiannual Statement of Account (SOA) submissions:

Videogame Piracy - A Present and Increasing Problem
Paolo Cerroni,Akash Sachdeva, November 15, 2013
TIGA, the trade association representing the UK videogame industry, has announced the findings of its 2013 piracy survey.

English Court Holds Ultimate Beneficial Owner (“UBO”) Liable For Losses To Creditors
Rod J. Cowper, November 05, 2013
The English Court has devised a new route to impose liability on a company's UBO who strips assets from the company leaving creditors to claim in its insolvency. UBOs feeling comfortable about the security of their corporate veil after the Supreme Court’s decision in Prest, will need to look...

Fourth Circuit Finds Copyright Transfers with Electronic Signatures to be Valid
Seth A. Davidson,Ari Z. Moskowitz, October 23, 2013
In a unanimous three-judge opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the “writing” and “signature” requirements for assigning a copyright can be met by clicking a button in a web browser. This gives greater certainty to enforceability of...

United States District Court in Boston Refuses to Enjoin Aereo’s Antenna/DVR Service
Seth A. Davidson,Arthur H. Harding, October 16, 2013
In the latest in a series of copyright infringement cases arising out of the deployment of “antenna/DVR” services such as that offered by Aereo and FilmOn, Judge Gorton of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts has denied a motion for preliminary injunction...

California Passes Three Privacy and Data Security Laws that Affect Many Companies
David L. Anderson,Theodore P. Augustinos,Karen L. Booth,Alan L. Friel, October 07, 2013
California recently passed three significant new privacy laws, increasing many companies’ privacy and data protection obligations.

UK Fast Track Opposition
Claire Lehr,John Olsen, October 03, 2013
In an effort to combat criticism of the UK-IPO trade mark opposition procedure, which can be lengthy and costly and therefore off-putting for smaller enterprises / individuals seeking to protect their rights, the UK-IPO has announced its intention to implement a new, fast track opposition. The...

Federal Judge Issues Nationwide Injunction Against Aereo Competitor FilmOn
Seth A. Davidson,Arthur H. Harding, September 14, 2013
On September 5, 2013, Judge Rosemary Collyer of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order blocking FilmOn from offering its antenna/DVR service. FilmOn (previously known as “BarryDriller.com” and “Aereokiller”) is essentially a knock-off...