Counsel registry

Potter Anderson & Corroon

35 case appearances 4 as plaintiff counsel · 31 as defendant counsel.

Firm overview

Potter Anderson & Corroon: Patent Litigation Summary

Firm Overview:
Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP is a prominent regional law firm headquartered in Wilmington, Delaware. As one of the oldest firms in the state, it has established itself as a major player in Delaware's legal landscape. While not an AmLaw 100 firm, Potter Anderson is one of the largest in Delaware, with over 100 attorneys. The firm operates from a single office in Wilmington, strategically positioned to practice extensively before the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, a key venue for patent litigation. The firm is consistently recognized by Chambers and Partners for its intellectual property practice in Delaware.

IP Litigation Specialty and Side Preference:
The firm's patent litigation practice is a significant component of its broader litigation department. It has a well-regarded, balanced practice, representing both plaintiffs and defendants in patent infringement disputes. The firm’s website states they are involved in well over 100 intellectual property cases at any given time. This experience is reflected in the single tracked case, Veloxis Pharmaceuticals AS v. Zydus Cadila et al., where the firm acted as local counsel for the plaintiff. The firm has experience across a wide range of technology sectors, including pharmaceuticals (ANDA), medical devices, telecommunications, software, and microprocessor technology.

Notable Cases and PTAB Practice:
While the provided case list is limited, public records indicate the firm's role in significant patent litigation. As local counsel, they have represented major technology companies such as Intel in a defense verdict win against a $2 billion infringement claim by AVM Technologies. The firm also represented IBM as Delaware counsel in a case against Groupon that resulted in an $82.5 million verdict for IBM. The firm’s attorneys are noted for their deep experience in the District of Delaware. Though comprehensive data on the firm's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) practice is not readily available, a 2019 report by Managing Intellectual Property noted the firm's involvement in 59 IPR petitions, indicating a presence in this specialized forum. More recent filings show continued representation of clients in IPR proceedings.

Key Partners:
The firm's intellectual property group is led by seasoned litigators. David E. Moore, mentioned in the tracked case, is a highly ranked patent litigator in Delaware by Chambers and Partners and is noted for his experience in cases involving medical devices and telecommunications. Bindu A. Palapura, also listed in the tracked case, is recognized for her work in patent and trade secret litigation, particularly in the pharmaceutical, chemical, and software sectors. Other key partners recognized by industry publications like IAM Patent 1000 include Philip A. Rovner, an experienced trial attorney, and Dr. Janet E. Reed, who leads the IP transactional and counseling practice with a focus on biotechnology and life sciences.

Attorneys

Roles

  • local counsel45
  • Local Counsel19
  • Potential Local Counsel2
  • lead local counsel1
  • lead counsel1

Cases (35)