Goodwin

Headquartered in Boston, where it remains a market leader, Goodwin (which underwent a rebranding within the past year, transitioning from its former DBA of Goodwin Procter) has since morphed into a global firm, with 10 offices (six in the US, covering both coasts) housing approximately 1,000 lawyers. The firm garners a robust level of client enthusiasm, with one testifying, “The firm has represented us in a number of matters due to their extensive expertise in the area of consumer financial services litigation. In addition to their expertise, they have a strong reputation among other counsel and with the judiciary. They are also very responsive and thorough in their research and strategy recommendations. They employ consideration of client costs and expenses; responsiveness and outside-the-box legal thinking.”

Consistent with its Boston roots, the firm enjoys a particular niche in the life sciences area, with several wins on the part of its litigators in patent and patent-related actions. Christopher Holding provides lead counsel to Actavis in antitrust litigation challenging a patent settlement agreement between the client and another pharmaceutical entity concerning generic versions of Intuniv, an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medication. Plaintiffs, direct and indirect purchasers of Intuniv, allege a “pay-for-delay” scheme between Shire and Actavis in which the pharmaceutical companies delayed generic competition for the drug through a settlement, leaving buyers without a generic option and creating supracompetitive prices. Holding is also playing a role in a case led by another Boston partner, Anthony Downs, for Teva USA as the company faced a $235 million judgment following a seven-day patent infringement trial. Goodwin persuaded the federal district court in Delaware to set aside the jury’s verdict as lacking support, and to find for Teva on the issue of infringement. Beyond IP and life sciences, the firm’s Boston office is also active in servicing that city’s thriving tech space in other varied commercial matters. Appellate specialist Kevin Martin led a unique case for the Massachusetts High Technology Council in opposition to a proposed amendment to the state constitution adding a 4% tax on all incomes over $1 million, which is inspected to increase income taxes on high-net-worth individuals, including the executives of most major Massachusetts businesses, by about $2 billion per year.

The New York office has also seen its share of matters for a “who’s who” list of life sciences clients. Elizabeth Holland regularly works on high-profile patent litigation cases for companies including Actavis, Teva, Boston Scientific, Ceva Sante, Enzymotec, Celltrion, and Lupin. She is participating in a case for Lupin, which filed an Abbreviated New Drug Application to market the generic version of Horizon Therapeutics’ branded urine disorder drug Ravicti. Horizon Therapeutics sued Lupin, asserting several patent claims—some of the which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board found unpatentable for obviousness after Goodwin filed inter-partes review petitions with Holland arguing on behalf of Lupin. A client voices on Holland’s behalf, “Elizabeth helped put together a winning strategy for our litigation and implemented the strategy flawlessly. All the while, she gave us honest assessments and sound advice that helped our management make critical decisions.” In 2017, a colleague also in the Empire City, Joanne Gray co-chairs the firm’s Food and Healthy Living Practice, which serves businesses in the food, restaurants, dietary supplements, and health living industries. Gray specializes in nationwide mass tort and products liability litigation for both publicly and privately held companies.

The DC office’s appellate practice has also seen a vibrant spike in activity, with Willy Jay keeping particularly busy. Jay provided lead counsel to Varsity Brands, a maker of cheerleading apparel, in a Supreme Court case that decided an important question of copyright law. At stake in the case were five copyrights that Varsity had obtained on original designs that appear on cheerleading uniforms. In March 2017, the Supreme Court decided in favor of the client. Jay also argued on behalf of a group of Indian tribes from western Washington State in the Supreme Court in a matter involving the interpretation of a set of historic treaties that protect the tribes’ fishing rights. Washington State has redirected numerous salmon-bearing streams through culverts that are impassable to fish, endangering the fragile fisheries. The tribes have successfully argued that refusing to repair these culverts violates the tribes’ treaty-protected rights. Goodwin was hired after the Supreme Court granted certiorari to defend the decision in favor of the tribes.

The firm has upped its game on the West Coast as well, bolstering its ranks recently with the high-profile acquisition of celebrated Silicon Valley intellectual property star Neel Chatterjee, who joined the firm in early 2017 from Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe. Chatterjee’s IP practice has garnered international attention. Before helping further develop Goodwin’s technology litigation practice, he represented major companies such as Microsoft, eBay and Synopsys, but he is well known for defending social media network Facebook and at its founder Mark Zuckerberg against claims that the internet entrepreneur stole the idea. “Neel Chatterjee is my guy for referrals,” chirps an approving peer. “He has the expertise necessary to take risks that others would never dare take, risks that pay off for the clients. He has that whole tech game down. [He] Knows that world inside