Gerald J. Flattmann, Jr.

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

Let me dig into the tracked NPE-side matters and the Federal Circuit outcome.

Gerald J. Flattmann, Jr. — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Focus areas. Flattmann's practice is centered on life sciences patent litigation — pharmaceutical, biologic, and biotechnology disputes, including Hatch-Waxman ANDA cases and BPCIA biosimilar litigation. Cahill's own bio and Chambers USA describe him as a life sciences/pharma patent litigator with more than 30 years representing companies in the sector. The tracked docket adds a hardware/semiconductor dimension: the Sentient Sensors and Blemel Technologies matters all turn on U.S. Patent No. 6,938,177 ("Multi-Chip Module Smart Controller"), an FPGA/multi-chip-module instrument controller asserted against chipmakers and instrumentation vendors. Law360's 2024 profile notes the Cahill team's work is "mostly" life sciences with additional technology and telecommunications matters. He is a registered patent attorney (Reg. No. 37,324).

Side preference. His broader practice is defense-side: brand pharmaceutical clients such as Galderma, Acorda, Alexion, Insys, and Supernus, plus biosimilar-related defense work. The tracked 5-plaintiff / 1-defendant split is a function of patent-owner representation rather than an NPE-prosecution practice — he served as lead counsel for Sentient Sensors (and, at Paul Hastings, for Blemel Technologies), both small patent-owner plaintiffs. In Xilinx, Inc. et al. v. Sentient Sensors, LLC, he represented the patent owner as respondent/defendant in the IPRs and related district court actions, which is why the same matter appears on both sides of the tally. Net: he works both sides, but the operating-company/brand-pharma defense practice is the larger part of his docket.

Firm context and notable matters. Flattmann is a partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel, where he co-chairs the Life Sciences Patent Litigation and Intellectual Property Litigation practice groups. He joined Cahill in January 2023 from King & Spalding to build its life sciences patent litigation practice, and previously practiced at Paul Hastings and Kirkland & Ellis, where he and Peter Armenio built that firm's IP life sciences practice in the 2000s. Verified results include: Amneal v. Supernus (IPR2013-00368), which his bio describes as the first IPR victory for a pharmaceutical company; Galderma v. Sun Pharmaceuticals and Galderma v. Amneal (Oracea ANDA), judgment and permanent injunction, affirmed on appeal; Galderma v. Mylan, preliminary injunction plus trial judgment affirmed; the Acorda/Ampyra IPRs, where he won all four proceedings and obtained non-institution in the Kyle Bass "Coalition for Affordable Drugs" petitions; and Amgen v. Alexion and Samsung Bioepis v. Alexion (Soliris biosimilar), resolved by favorable settlement. More recently, the Sentient Sensors campaign went against his client: the PTAB found the '177 patent claims obvious (final written decision, Sept. 18, 2024, IPR2023-00195), and the Federal Circuit affirmed under Rule 36 on April 10, 2026. The parallel Sentient Sensors v. Cypress Semiconductor (D. Del. No. 19-1868) was terminated by joint motion to dismiss with prejudice, and Blemel Technologies v. National Instruments (E.D. Tex. 2:15-cv-134; later W.D. Tex.) closed in November 2016.

PTAB / IPR experience. This is a significant part of his practice — his bio lists lead or trial counsel roles in numerous IPRs, including first-chairing the early Kyle Bass hedge-fund petitions, the Acorda/Ampyra proceedings, the Amgen and Samsung Bioepis biosimilar IPRs, and the Xilinx IPR against Sentient Sensors, including the resulting Federal Circuit appeal.

Bar and education. Admitted in New York (1993) and the District of Columbia (1993), before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and registered with the USPTO; Yale University, B.S. (1989) and Harvard Law School, J.D. (1992–93; sources differ slightly on the class year). He has been repeatedly ranked in IAM Patent 1000 (Gold) and Chambers USA, and was named Best Lawyers' 2022 New York City Lawyer of the Year for Litigation–Intellectual Property.

Note: outcomes above are drawn from Cahill's published professional bio, PTAB and Federal Circuit filings/opinions, and Law360 reporting; the firm bio is the source for several matter results and is not independently verified in every instance.