"Williams & Connolly is the best patent trial outfit in the country."

“Its collaboration is always seamless and its success story unlimited.”

- IAM Patent, 2021

Williams & Connolly’s reputation for handling “bet-the-company” civil litigation at the trial and appellate levels applies equally to the firm’s thriving Intellectual Property Practice. Major corporations including Google, AstraZeneca, Dropbox, Roche/Genentech, Samsung, Pfizer, Intel, Eli Lilly, and many others place their trust in Williams & Connolly litigators to handle major intellectual property matters, particularly in patent litigation and related licensing disputes.

About 50 Williams & Connolly attorneys devote a substantial portion of their practice to patent cases, including sixteen former clerks of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Many of our lawyers practicing in this area have science degrees, and fifteen have been admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

A major part of Williams & Connolly’s patent litigation practice is representing pharmaceutical companies in Hatch-Waxman pharmaceutical patent litigation.

Williams & Connolly has handled over 100 IPR proceedings, including numerous concurrent with district court proceedings in Hatch-Waxman cases.

Representative areas of concentration include:

Biotechnology/Pharmaceuticals:  A major part of Williams & Connolly’s patent litigation practice is representing brand-name pharmaceutical companies in Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA pharmaceutical patent litigation against competitors seeking to sell generic and biosimilar versions of the brand companies’ drugs. Over the years, the firm achieved significant successes for many companies in these disputes and others involving a diverse array of highly successful drugs, prevailing numerous times at trial and in the Federal Circuit.

We have represented the following pharmaceutical clients in these matters:

• Genentech in the Central District of California, the District of Delaware, and the Federal Circuit in its BPCIA litigation against Amgen regarding Avastin.
• Pfizer at trial and in the Federal Circuit in litigation over Pfizer’s billion dollar a year anti-cancer drug Sutent
• MedImmune in the Eastern District of Virginia and the Federal Circuit in litigation against AbbVie regarding the payment of royalties for its Humira product. 

Electronics and Software:  The firm handles major patent and licensing matters in the electronics and software fields. The firm routinely serves as counsel in trial courts and the Federal Circuit, as well as in international arbitrations, on behalf of major technology firms including Samsung, Google, Dropbox, Acer, ASUS, Motorola, AOL and Intel.

We have represented the following clients in these matters:

• Samsung in an international patent licensing arbitration relating to standard essential patents and products with billions of dollars in revenue
• Acer and ASUS in patent litigation in the Northern District of California and Federal Circuit in which Philips Electronics asserted eleven patents against various smartphones, tablets and laptop computers
• Google in multiple inter partes review proceedings and associated Federal Circuit appeals relating to user interface and other patents

Medical and Mechanical Devices:  The firm has handled or is handling a number of significant patent and license disputes concerning a wide variety of devices, including surgical instruments for cancer diagnosis and treatment, implantable defibrillators, marine seismic survey technology, laser hair removal equipment, and biosensors for blood testing.

We have represented the following medical and mechanical device clients in these matters:

• Mirowski Family Ventures at trial and in the appeal of a $309.3 million verdict in a complex breach of contract and patent licensing trial against Boston Scientific
• ION Geophysical in patent infringement litigation against WesternGeco in district court and the Federal Circuit regarding marine seismic surveys.
• SenoRx in a patent infringement suit filed by Hologic claiming infringement of patents relating to a device for irradiating breast tissue following a lumpectomy 

Inter Partes Review/Patent Office Disputes:  The firm has handled close to 100 Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings before the patent office, and our lawyers currently serve as lead counsel in a number of IPRs for both Patent Owners and Petitioners. Many of the IPRs handled by the firm involve parallel district court litigation. The firm has served as counsel in other patent office proceedings of strategic importance to the firm’s clients, including interferences.

We have represented the following clients in these matters:

• Pfizer subsidiary Wyeth against Apotex in one of the first inter partes review pharmaceutical patent cases decided by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
• AstraZeneca against Sanofi in connection with patents regarding the parties’ diabetes products
• Google, in inter partes review proceedings in connection with issues related to digital image storage and transmission, software and hardware, and online search technology

Other Proceedings:  Williams & Connolly's patent experience is also brought to bear in other contexts.  For example, the firm has been lead counsel in multiple antitrust matters involving allegations of unlawful settlements of Hatch-Waxman litigation, including in the first class action antitrust trial involving claims for “pay-for-delay” after Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis.  Williams & Connolly also has been retained on numerous occasions by other major law firms accused of malpractice resulting from patent litigation or prosecution.