Intellectual Property Litigation
Our Intellectual Property Litigation attorneys have the resources, knowledge and experience to respond quickly and forcefully to our clients’ needs for litigation services and to meet any challenge. Our attorneys have represented clients in a broad range of industries involving all aspects of IP rights, and have demonstrated success in bench and jury trials and appeals in federal and state courts, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Taft is recognized for IP litigation in the IAM Patent 1000 rankings.
Our IP litigation experience includes:
- Patent litigation.
- Inter Partes Review.
- Hatch-Waxman litigation.
- Trademark infringement.
- Copyright infringement.
- Trade dress infringement.
- Opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
- Domain name dispute proceedings.
- Trade secret violations.
- False advertising.
- Unfair competition.
Taft has experienced, highly qualified patent litigators to bring and defend patent infringement lawsuits anywhere within the United States. Taft’s nationwide intellectual property practice has recently litigated cases in California, Virginia, Kentucky, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Rhode Island, Delaware, Texas, Indiana and Ohio, representing companies located in Japan, Canada, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, California and Connecticut, among others.
Taft’s attorneys have litigated patent disputes covering all types of technology, including, for example, semiconductor manufacturing tools and processes, sports apparel, highway transportation advisory systems, high speed variable data printing, baby swings and other baby products, noise and vibration dampeners, optics, ink compositions and containers, pharmaceutical drugs, food storage containers, biotechnology methods and compositions and sprinkler systems, among others.
Taft’s patent attorneys have spoken throughout the country on cutting edge issues in patent law, advised and presented to numerous universities and serviced a wide range of domestic and international clients.
Pharmaceutical and Life Sciences Litigation
For those clients specializing in generic drugs and biosimilar products, Taft has a team of experienced professionals who can guide you from concept to market, and everything in between. Our team has dedicated its practice to the Hatch-Waxman Act and the Biologics Price Competition & Innovation Act, providing extensive experience and insight on the related patent, regulatory and economic issues. With more than half of the firm’s nearly 400 lawyers focusing on litigation, there is a deep bench of talent available for high-stakes patent cases, making Taft the law firm for several of the world’s leading drug companies.
While more detail is provided in our specific practice group description, we have counseled on well over one hundred generic drug products, including several of the industry’s top at-risk launches, as well as the market’s top biosimilar targets. Outside the courtroom, our team writes and lectures frequently on drug and biosimilar related issues, sharing their thoughts with the legal and pharmaceutical communities. For example, in the second edition of ANDA Litigation: Strategies & Tactics for Pharmaceutical Patent Litigators, our team has authored a chapter on citizen petition strategies and market tactics. Numerous other topics are detailed in the presentations and publications section.
Please see our specific practice group description for a detailed list of ANDA matters in which we have represented our clients.
Ranked National Tier 1 by Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” for Litigation – Intellectual Property (2021 – 2024)
- Kjaer Weis, Inc. v. Kimsaprincess, Inc. (N.D. Ill and C.D.CA). Represented New York and European based make up company in national litigation relating to the production, distribution, and sale of makeup in a trademark infringement case involving well known reality television personality.
- ABT, Inc. v. ACO Polymer Products (W.D., N.C.). Represented ACO Polymer Products, Inc. in defense of unfair competition and misappropriation of trade secret claims against client.
- Buztronics, Inc. v. Litecubes, L.L.C. (S.D. Ind.). Represented Litecubes, LLC, the owner of certain patents, copyrights and trademarks associated with “light-up” plastic ice cubes against an infringement of its patents, copyrights and trade dress.
- Planet Hollywood, Inc. v. Hollywood Casino Corporation (N.D. Ill.). Represented gaming entity in a trade name/trademark dispute filed by Planet Hollywood regarding re-theming of the Aladdin Casino in Las Vegas.
- Tri-State Hospital Supply Corp. v. Medi-Pac LLC (S.D. Oh.). Represented a medical supply company in a patent infringement, trademark infringement, and cybersquatting matter.
- Burger King Corporation et al v. Steak N Shake Company et al (S.D. Fla.). Represented Steak N Shake in trademark infringement matter.
- WMH Tool Group, Inc. v. Woodstock International, Inc. and Grizzly Industrial, Inc. (N.D. Ill.). Represented Grizzly and Woodstock in a trademark infringement action brought by WMH which sought to enjoin Grizzly’s and Woodstock’s use of the color white for woodworking and metal working machines. Obtained a TRO restraining WMH and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from seizing Woodstock’s and Grizzly’s machines at a trade show, and subsequently obtained a preliminary injunction order requiring WMH to consent to the release of Woodstock’s and Grizzly’s Asian manufactured products detained by CBP at U.S. ports of entry.
- Kaufman Global, LLC v. Implementation Services, LLC (S.D. Ind.). Suit for copyright infringement and trademark infringement in which the defendant secretly continued using materials long after a license agreement expired.
- Direct Marketing Concepts, Inc. v. Trudeau (9th Cir., C.D. Cal., E.D. Pa., and N.D. Ill.). Represented infomercial producer in national litigation relating to production, distribution and product sale rights and use of the participants’ names and likenesses.
- TVProducts USA, Inc. v. Max Sales Corp. (S.D. Oh.). Represented a distributor of consumer products trademark and patent suit against competitor offering knock-off products.
- August Stork KG vs. Farley Candy Company (N.D. Ill.). Represented manufacturer of WERTHER’S ORIGINAL candies in a lawsuit accusing a rival candy manufacturer of infringing the trade dress and trademarks of Stock’s WERTHER’S ORIGINAL packaging. We obtained a jury verdict and Storck was awarded a permanent injunction restraining Farley from imitating Storck’s packaging and over $4 million in compensatory and punitive damages.
- Genuine Productions, Inc. v. York Entertainment, Inc. (A.F.M.A). Represented independent film producer in lawsuit against film distributor relating to film’s distribution rights and proceeds.
- Oleg Cassini Inc. vs. Cassini Tailors (DC, W.D. Texas). Represented fashion designer in trademark infringement action and obtained summary judgment that defendant’s use of the name “Cassini” infringed the federal trademark rights of Oleg Cassini.
- AF2, LLC v. TVF, LLC (N.D. Ill.). Represented the af2 indoor football league in prosecuting an injunction action against a former franchisee that attempted to move to a competing indoor football league and to rename and rebrand the team with confusingly similar marks.
- Geneva Flavors, Inc. v. Fontana Flavors, Inc. (Wisc.). Represented manufacturer of food flavors in a claim of wrongful misappropriation of trade secrets under the Wisconsin Trade Secrets Act.
- Accurate Leather & Novelty Co. Inc. v. LTD Commodities Inc., (N.D. Ill.). Represented designer and manufacturer of high fashion handbags in trade dress infringement action.