Michael C. Stuart
Partner
Partner
Areas of Expertise
Patent Litigation, Including Hatch-Waxman Act Generic Drug Cases
Trademark and Trade Secret Litigation
Patent Prosecution
Advice Concerning Patent Infringement and Validity Issues
Professional Summary
Mr. Stuart has been practicing intellectual property law since 1983. He has extensive experience prosecuting and defending patent, trademark and trade secret cases, including more than 18 years in Hatch-Waxman patent infringement litigations concerning generic drugs, including omeprazole, pantoprazole, nifedipine, AZT, famotidine, enalapril and ranitidine. He has represented clients in pretrial proceedings, and in oral and written arguments before numerous Federal trial and appellate courts.
In the patent procurement field, Mr. Stuart’s practice covers the technical fields of electrical, electronic, mechanical, electromechanical, optic, telecommunications, business methods, and computer hardware and software arts. He has extensive experience in the preparation and prosecution of United States and international (PCT) patent applications, and in the preparation of studies relating to the infringement, validity and enforceability of patents.
Education
M.S., Electrical Engineering, Columbia University, 1983
J.D., Hofstra Law School, 1981
B.S., Earth and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1978
Admissions
New York
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Courts: Southern, Eastern and Northern Districts of New York, Eastern and Western Districts of Wisconsin
Memberships
New York Intellectual Property Law Association
Articles
“Protecting Pharmaceutical Products, Processes and R&D from Competitive Challenges,” Pharmaceutical Technology Magazine
Decisions
Metso Minerals, Inc v Powerscreen Intl. Distribution Ltd, Terex Corp, Powerscreen New York Inc, Emerald Equipment Systems, Inc Case No 06-cv-1446 (ADS)(E)(January 28, 2010)
Altana Pharma AG and Wyeth v. Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries LTD and SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, LTD., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2008-1039, 566 F.3d 999 (May 13, 2009).
In re Omeprazole Patent Litigation, 265 F. Supp. 2d 213 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).
Valmet Paper Mach. Inc. v. Beloit Corp., 105 F.3d 1409 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Glaxo Inc., Glaxo Group Limited, and Allen and Hanburys Limited v. Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, and Boehringer Ingelheim Chemicals, Inc., 40 U.S.P.Q.2D 1848 (D.Conn. 1996).
Glaxo Inc., Glaxo Group Limited, and Hanburys Limited v. Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation and Boehringer Ingelheim Chemicals, Inc., 954 F. Supp. 469, 41 U.S.P.Q.2D 1445 (D.Conn. 1996).
Mr. Stuart has been practicing intellectual property law since 1983. He has extensive experience prosecuting and defending patent, trademark and trade secret cases, including more than 18 years in Hatch-Waxman patent infringement litigations concerning generic drugs, including omeprazole, pantoprazole, nifedipine, AZT, famotidine, enalapril and ranitidine. He has represented clients in pretrial proceedings, and in oral and written arguments before numerous Federal trial and appellate courts.
In the patent procurement field, Mr. Stuart’s practice covers the technical fields of electrical, electronic, mechanical, electromechanical, optic, telecommunications, business methods, and computer hardware and software arts. He has extensive experience in the preparation and prosecution of United States and international (PCT) patent applications, and in the preparation of studies relating to the infringement, validity and enforceability of patents.
Education
M.S., Electrical Engineering, Columbia University, 1983
J.D., Hofstra Law School, 1981
B.S., Earth and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1978
Admissions
New York
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Courts: Southern, Eastern and Northern Districts of New York, Eastern and Western Districts of Wisconsin
Memberships
New York Intellectual Property Law Association
Articles
“Protecting Pharmaceutical Products, Processes and R&D from Competitive Challenges,” Pharmaceutical Technology Magazine
Decisions
Metso Minerals, Inc v Powerscreen Intl. Distribution Ltd, Terex Corp, Powerscreen New York Inc, Emerald Equipment Systems, Inc Case No 06-cv-1446 (ADS)(E)(January 28, 2010)
Altana Pharma AG and Wyeth v. Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries LTD and SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, LTD., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2008-1039, 566 F.3d 999 (May 13, 2009).
In re Omeprazole Patent Litigation, 265 F. Supp. 2d 213 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).
Valmet Paper Mach. Inc. v. Beloit Corp., 105 F.3d 1409 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Glaxo Inc., Glaxo Group Limited, and Allen and Hanburys Limited v. Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, and Boehringer Ingelheim Chemicals, Inc., 40 U.S.P.Q.2D 1848 (D.Conn. 1996).
Glaxo Inc., Glaxo Group Limited, and Hanburys Limited v. Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation and Boehringer Ingelheim Chemicals, Inc., 954 F. Supp. 469, 41 U.S.P.Q.2D 1445 (D.Conn. 1996).
