Contarino Roth

I'll research the firm before writing anything.

Let me dig into the firm's website, IP practice, and any patent-specific matters.

Let me verify the firm's web presence and whether it has any patent-specific docket footprint.

Contarino Roth — Patent Litigation Practice Summary

Important caveat up front: the available record does not support describing Contarino Roth as having a patent litigation practice. The structured case list contains a single tracked appearance — an untitled matter, plaintiff side, with Josiah Contarino listed as of counsel — and web research surfaced no patent docket entries, no IPR/PGR filings, and no published IP practice description for the firm. The summary below reflects what is documented and flags what is not.

Firm overview. Contarino Roth LLC is a very small litigation boutique, not BigLaw, not an IP boutique, and not a regional patent shop. Public filings show address listings at 50 Park Place, Suite 1105, Newark, NJ; 101 Eisenhower Parkway, Suite 300, Roseland, NJ; 2255 Glades Road, Suite 324A, Boca Raton, FL; and 1601 Forum Place, West Palm Beach, FL (CourtListener dockets; RECAP filings in D.N.J. 3:25-cv-17612 and M.D. Tenn. 3:26-cv-00556). Two attorneys appear repeatedly in the public record: Josiah Contarino and Jacob William Roth, both of whom previously practiced at Dhillon Law Group. No AmLaw, Chambers, Vault, or Law360 firm profile was located, and no official firm website surfaced in searches — so no size, revenue, or ranking indicator can be responsibly asserted. Jus Connect lists two arbitration practitioners associated with the firm and one commercial arbitration (machinery and equipment).

IP litigation specialty. No technology specialty is documented. The firm's visible docket is dominated by election and voting-rights litigation, civil rights and terrorism-liability litigation, and general commercial/arbitration work — not Wi-Fi standards, pharma, semiconductors, software, or mechanical patent disputes. The closest adjacent data point is Rare Breed Triggers Inc. v. Big Daddy Enterprises Inc. (N.D. Fla. 1:25-cv-00181), a dispute touching patents and trademarks on forced-reset firearm triggers, in which Josiah Contarino appeared while at Dhillon Law Group, not under the Contarino Roth banner. That matter therefore should not be counted as a firm appearance, though it is the only patent-adjacent work traceable to a named firm attorney.

Side preference. The one tracked appearance is plaintiff-side, in an of counsel role — a thin basis for any characterization, but it is consistent with the firm's overall posture: the public record shows the firm bringing affirmative suits (e.g., as counsel for the Republican National Committee), not defending operating companies against infringement claims. There is no evidence of NPE/PAE patent assertion work, and equally no evidence of defendant-side patent defense work. Side preference in the patent context is best described as unestablished.

Notable cases and outcomes. No prominent patent case exists in the tracked list — the sole entry is untitled in the dataset, and I will not substitute a case name for it. Documented matters (outside patent law) include Republican National Committee v. Way (D.N.J. 3:25-cv-17612), an NVRA voter-list maintenance action in which the RNC designated Contarino as trial counsel; RNC v. Caldwell (D.N.J., filed Sept. 2026); and Horowitz v. AJP Educational Foundation Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 1:25-cv-03412). Separately, in the N.D. Fla. trigger case, defendants moved to revoke the pro hac vice admission of Contarino and co-counsel — the search results do not disclose the disposition, so no outcome should be stated. No verdicts, Federal Circuit appeals, or verified settlements attributable to this firm were found.

PTAB / IPR practice. None identified. Searches returned no IPR, PGR, or CBM filings naming Contarino Roth or its attorneys, and no public report supports any PTAB filing volume. On the available evidence the firm does not have an IPR practice of any scale.

Key attorneys. Two names are reliably sourced from court filings: Josiah Contarino (New Jersey/New York; Newark office; listed as the firm attorney on the one tracked appearance) and Jacob William Roth (Florida Bar No. 1036551; Boca Raton office; admitted in the S.D., M.D., and N.D. of Florida). I found no third or fourth IP litigation partner, and no ranking source identifying either attorney as an IP litigation leader. Notably, neither is identified in the sources reviewed as a registered patent attorney.

Bottom line: if the goal is a profile of a patent litigation practice, this firm does not appear to be the right subject. Any such profile would rest on a single untitled, of-counsel appearance rather than a demonstrable practice.