Josiah Contarino

I'll research this attorney's background and practice.

Josiah A. Contarino — patent litigation summary

Specialty / focus. Contarino's docket is not a dedicated patent practice. His tracked patent-side work is concentrated in a single, mechanical-arts dispute: the forced-reset AR-15 trigger patent litigation captioned in the data as ABC IP, LLC et al. v. Big Daddy Enterprises, Inc. (tracked as plaintiff-side, Dhillon Law Group). That family — Rare Breed Triggers, LLC v. Big Daddy Enterprises, Inc., No. 1:21-cv-00149 (N.D. Fla.); ABC IP LLC v. Big Daddy Enterprises, Inc., No. 1:22-cv-00061; and a 2025 refiling against the same defendants — concerns U.S. Patent No. 10,514,223 ("Firearm Trigger Mechanism") and competitor trigger devices (the Wide Open Trigger and the Powered By Graves ALAMO-15). Firm bios and directories describe his broader practice as commercial litigation, construction, transportation, First Amendment/Second Amendment, defamation, employment, and election law, with intellectual property listed only as an additional area. So the technology exposure is firearms/mechanical rather than Wi-Fi, pharma, or software.

Side preference. The structured data shows 2 plaintiff-side appearances and 0 defendant-side; both tracked matters are plaintiff-side. Caution is warranted before labeling him a PAE/NPE prosecutor: the patent plaintiff here is the patent owner and its exclusive licensee (ABC IP, LLC and Rare Breed Triggers, LLC) suing a competitor, i.e., an operating-company-versus-competitor assertion rather than a serial assertion campaign. One third-party docket aggregator tags the 2022 case as "Patent Owner / NPE," but that is a database classification of the plaintiff, not verified evidence of a PAE practice model. Outside patent law, his client mix includes both plaintiffs and defendants, including Representative Ami Horowitz and the Republican National Committee as plaintiffs.

Firm context. He practiced at Dhillon Law Group Inc. out of the firm's Newark, New Jersey office (50 Park Place, Suite 1105), where filings identify him as counsel. Court filings state that effective January 19, 2026 he became affiliated with Contarino Roth LLC at the same Newark address; a 2026 Rule 7.1 letter in Republican National Committee v. Way (D.N.J.) is signed from that firm, and an RNC filing designates him as trial counsel. The structured data's second tracked matter (Contarino Roth, of counsel) is untitled in the source list, so no case details are available to verify.

Notable results. In the trigger litigation, the court (Judge Robert L. Hinkle, N.D. Fla.) granted a preliminary injunction for plaintiffs on December 30, 2021, finding the accused product "plainly copied" and infringement likely; the court later entered a consent judgment and permanent injunction in 2022 in which the defendants agreed the '223 patent claims are valid and enforceable and barred from challenging infringement, validity, or enforceability. In the 2025 refiling, Contarino appears on the plaintiff's discovery, scheduling, and protective-order disputes. No Federal Circuit appeals or jury verdicts involving Contarino were located in the sources reviewed.

PTAB / IPR. No IPR, PGR, or other PTAB proceedings naming Contarino were found; the patent dispute appears to have been litigated exclusively in district court.

Bar / education. New Jersey Bar No. 003962013; his filings state he is admitted in New York and New Jersey. Best Lawyers lists a 2012 graduation from Regent University (degree type not confirmed in the sources reviewed).