Connor S. Romm

I'll research this attorney's professional background before drafting the summary.

Let me verify education, bar admission, and the tracked Neurelis case, plus check for PTAB/IPR activity.

Let me check his firm bio for credentials and verify the outcome of the Astellas matter he worked on.

Connor S. Romm — patent litigation practice summary

Focus areas. Romm's practice centers on IP litigation, with a concentration in pharmaceutical and life-sciences patent disputes — chiefly Hatch-Waxman/ANDA litigation over Orange Book-listed patents — alongside software licensing and source-code misappropriation disputes, Lanham Act false-advertising claims, and general commercial/healthcare litigation (No Surprises Act, ERISA, contract, fraud/RICO). His publicly attributed case work is pharma-heavy rather than Wi-Fi/standards or mechanical: the tracked matter, Neurelis, Inc. v. Padagis LLC (D. Del.), concerns generic diazepam nasal spray (VALTOCO) and the '546, '414, '786, '664, and '400 patents, and public filings also place him on the McDermott team representing Astellas in the mirabegron (Myrbetriq) ANDA litigation in D. Del. (Astellas Pharma Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., C.A. 20-1589; Astellas v. Lupin/Zydus, C.A. 23-819). His published case commentary (McDermott's IP Update / National Law Review) covers Federal Circuit and ITC decisions on the on-sale bar, Section 337 domestic industry, and copyright/attorneys' fees — indicating appellate-monitoring work in addition to trial-level litigation.

Side preference. The tracked data shows one appearance, on the plaintiff side, and that overstates any "enforcement-focused" characterization: his client base is branded/innovator pharmaceutical companies asserting Orange Book patents against ANDA filers, not NPEs or PAEs. There is no tracked record of him defending accused infringers, though his firm bio describes representing clients in software and commercial disputes that are often defensive in posture. Net: predominantly patent-owner/brand-company side, not a PAE practice.

Firm context. He is an associate at McDermott Will & Emery (now appearing as McDermott Will & Schulte LLP), based in the firm's Boston office. No prior firm history appears in the tracked data or in searchable professional sources; the record indicates McDermott is his practice home to date.

Notable cases / PTAB. The most prominent tracked matter is the Neurelis v. Padagis ANDA litigation, which has spawned multiple related D. Del. actions against Padagis, Lupin, and Amneal; he is listed as counsel for Neurelis. Notably, Padagis has filed parallel IPRs against Neurelis patents (IPR2025-00464/-465/-466) in which McDermott is listed as patent-owner counsel — but the PTAB counsel disclosures name other McDermott attorneys (e.g., Michael Sitzman, David Tobin) as lead/back-up, and I could not verify Romm's individual appearance in those proceedings. I also could not verify a specific verdict or Federal Circuit outcome attributable to him personally; Law360 coverage of the Astellas mirabegron matter (in which he was among the McDermott attorneys featured) involved a Delaware ruling adverse to the asserted patent, so no favorable-result claim should be attributed to him on that record.

Bar / education. JD, Boston College Law School, where he was editor-in-chief of the Boston College Intellectual Property and Technology Forum and articles editor of the Boston College Law Review; his student note on AI and the PHOSITA standard was published at 62 B.C. L. Rev. (2021). Bar admission state(s) and USPTO registration are not confirmed in the sources reviewed and are omitted here.

Caveat: the appearance counts above derive from the one tracked case; public docket records show additional matters (e.g., the Astellas ANDA litigations) not reflected in that count, so this summary likely understates his total litigation activity.