Frank E. Simmerman, Jr.

Attorney Summary — Frank E. Simmerman, Jr.

Specialty / focus. Simmerman's patent work centers on pharmaceutical/biologic patent litigation — specifically BPCIA biosimilar disputes venued in the Northern District of West Virginia. Both tracked appearances sit within the consolidated In re Aflibercept (EYLEA) Patent Litigation (MDL No. 1:24-md-3103-TSK, N.D.W. Va.): Regeneron v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals (as of counsel) and Regeneron v. Samsung Bioepis (local counsel). Tracking data classifies him 2–0 plaintiff-side, representing innovator Regeneron enforcing EYLEA formulation/method patents against biosimilar applicants; his broader public-profile practice (per Martindale/TechLawyers) is general civil and trial work in West Virginia, so his patent exposure appears to be local-counsel/conduit work rather than lead patent advocacy. No Wi-Fi, software, or mechanical patent indications.

Firm context. Public directories and court filings identify him as a member of Simmerman Law Office, PLLC (Clarksburg, WV), with an earlier partnership at Allen, Johnson & Simmerman (Prabook). The tracking database attributes these two appearances to Jackson Kelly (of counsel / local counsel roles) — an attribution I could not independently corroborate in public directories, which may reflect co-counsel arrangements in these NDWV matters rather than a current practice affiliation. Caveat on naming: Frank E. Simmerman, III, also of the firm, co-signs many filings, so appearances should be disambiguated.

Notable cases / outcomes. In Regeneron v. Mylan, Regeneron won a nine-day bench trial on infringement/validity and obtained a permanent injunction (June 2024), which was vacated when the case settled via stipulated dismissal in April 2025. In Regeneron v. Samsung Bioepis, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction on Jan. 29, 2025 (Nos. 2024-1965/-1966/-2082/-2083) — a significant BPCIA ruling on personal jurisdiction over foreign biosimilar applicants, also rejecting obviousness-type double-patenting and § 112 challenges. Separately verifiable: in Actelion v. Mylan (No. 1:23-cv-88, N.D.W. Va.), the Simmerman firm (including Jr.) represented Actelion and secured a September 2024 consent judgment in which Mylan admitted validity and infringement of U.S. Patent 7,094,781. One data conflict to flag: docket records in the Samsung Bioepis action show the Simmerman firm entering an appearance for Samsung Bioepis for the limited purpose of contesting personal jurisdiction — defendant-side work that cuts against the plaintiff-only classification in the tracking data; the firm appears to serve as NDWV local counsel on both sides of this MDL.

PTAB / bar. No evidence of regular IPR/PGR practice — his patent work appears confined to district-court local-counsel roles. Education/admission (Martindale): B.S. 1973 and J.D. 1978, West Virginia University; admitted in West Virginia since 1978, including the N.D. W. Va., S.D. W. Va., Fourth Circuit, and U.S. Supreme Court.