Steven C. Shanton

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

Professional Summary: Steven C. Shanton

Specialty / focus areas. The one tracked matter places Mr. Shanton in pharmaceutical/biologics patent litigation: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd., a dispute between a brand biologics manufacturer and a biosimilar developer (the docket context, including related Regeneron filings against Celltrion in the Northern District of West Virginia, is consistent with the aflibercept/EYLEA biosimilar litigation, though I could not verify the specific patents or product at issue from public sources). No other technology areas are documented in the tracked data. Web search did not surface a practice-area description attributable to this attorney.

Side preference. He appears exclusively on the plaintiff/patent-holder side in the tracked record (1 of 1 appearances as plaintiff, 0 as defendant), acting for a branded pharmaceutical innovator rather than for an NPE/PAE or as a routine defense-side counsel. Given the single data point, this reflects one matter rather than an established pattern, and it should not be read as a firm-wide or career-long orientation.

Firm context. He is listed with Leydig, Voit & Mayer, a Chicago-headquartered IP boutique with additional offices in Washington, DC and elsewhere, where he appears of record as Counsel. I could not verify any prior firm affiliations, in-house roles, or a start date at Leydig from publicly searchable sources.

Notable cases, PTAB/IPR, and credentials. The sole tracked case, Regeneron v. Samsung Bioepis, is the only matter in the record; I found no verifiable verdicts, settlements, or Federal Circuit appeals attributable to him. No IPR/PGR filings or other PTAB proceedings involving him were located in searches. His bar admissions, education, and registration status could not be independently confirmed.

Sourcing caveat. The name is shared by at least one unrelated individual appearing in patent records (an inventor named in the TecSec litigation), so searches for "Shanton" return substantial noise. Outside the tracked case list, I was unable to locate a firm biography, court opinion, or credible third-party source (Law360, Reuters Legal, Justia) documenting this attorney's background. This summary therefore rests almost entirely on the authoritative case data provided, and the details a reader would normally expect — bar admissions, education, prior firms, and PTAB experience — remain unverified.