Landmark Litigation
Gerald Sobel has litigated and tried many complex cases in over 40 years of practice. By way of example, his trials include two landmark jury wins in cases of exceptional complexity. He represented Xerox in its win in the SCM v. Xerox case, including a year-long antitrust trial involving office copier technology in the District of Connecticut -- the longest federal civil jury trial. He was lead counsel for Xoma in its win on patent infringement against Centocor before a San Francisco jury -- the longest biotech patent and license trial. Mr. Sobel achieved another landmark win, for Pfizer against the University of Rochester, in the Celebrex® patent infringement case on summary judgment and then on appeal at the Federal Circuit.
MEHRHe has represented a substantial number of companies among the Fortune Global 200, as well as startups, one-product companies and major universities.
Recommendations
Mr. Sobel is listed in the leading peer-based guide, Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business 2010, in the top category under “New York IP Lawyers,” defined as lawyers who are “the sages” of their fields and “deeply admired throughout the profession.” Mr. Sobel is described as a “revered litigator” and also as “huge in the life sciences IP field.” Mr. Sobel is regularly listed among Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers in America. The Legal 500 2007–2010 editions ranked Kaye Scholer in the top-tier for Patent Litigation-Life Sciences.
Patent Litigation
Mr. Sobel has handled major patent and trade secret litigations in a wide variety of technologies. Biotech, pharmaceuticals and medical devices have been an emphasis, including many patent litigations concerning blockbuster small molecule and biotech drugs and diagnostics for research-based pharmaceutical and biotech companies and universities, as well as significant cases involving medical devices. A number of these cases have involved products with among the highest sales and profits in the world, multidistrict litigations, and parallel cases and trials abroad.
He has represented both patentees and alleged infringers. Mr. Sobel routinely counsels clients concerning the strength of their positions with respect to intellectual property. He is a frequent lecturer on patent topics.
Licensing, Research and Marketing Agreements
In the area of patent and technology licensing, Mr. Sobel has negotiated, drafted and litigated many licensing arrangements. These have frequently been cross-licenses, international in scope and of great commercial significance. The litigated agreements have included worldwide agreements, joint research development and marketing ventures, and research sponsorship arrangements. A significant number have involved biotech drugs. Mr. Sobel created and taught the course covering antitrust and its interaction with intellectual property and licensing at the NYU School of Law and has lectured on licensing at the Columbia Law School.
Antitrust
Mr. Sobel has litigated and/or tried many important antitrust cases, including, for example, matters concerning pharmaceuticals, biotech drugs, dyestuffs, office copiers, electrical generator components, cameras and flash attachments, and gasoline. He has extensive experience in litigating and trying antitrust issues concerning patents and licensing. He has represented both antitrust plaintiffs and defendants. Mr. Sobel has been a frequent lecturer on antitrust topics.
Trademark and Commercial Litigation
Mr. Sobel has also handled significant trademark and trade dress cases, as well as a variety of commercial litigations, including contract and real estate cases involving the redevelopment of Times Square and related First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment issues.
Arbitration, Mediation and Settlement
Mr. Sobel is a mediator in the mediation programs at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and the New York State Supreme Court, Commercial Division. As a litigator, Mr. Sobel has negotiated settlements of many cases and he has also represented clients at several significant arbitrations and mediations. He has written and lectured on innovative alternative forms of dispute resolution in complex litigation for the Center for Public Resources.
Trials and Appeals
Mr. Sobel has tried cases throughout the country, including New York, Hartford, San Francisco, Seattle, Puerto Rico, Cincinnati and Salt Lake City. He has been active in appellate matters as well, particularly at the Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit.
Academic and Professional Activities
Mr. Sobel’s activities have included the following: member of the Advisory Committee on Patent Litigation of the U.S. District Court in Delaware; member of the Advisory Committee of the Engelberg Intellectual Property Institute at the NYU School of Law; adjunct associate professor at the NYU School of Law and co-lecturer at the Columbia Law School. He has also lectured at the Stanford, George Washington, Fordham, Brooklyn, Case Western and Washington University (St. Louis) Law Schools.
Mr. Sobel has published numerous papers in law reviews and other publications on topics relating to patents, antitrust, licensing, joint ventures and alternative dispute resolution (ADR). To illustrate, these include the following: Consideration of Patent Validity in Antitrust Cases Challenging Settlements, Fed. Cir. B.J. Vol. 20, Nos. 1 and 2 (2010); Reconsidering the Scope of the Inequitable Conduct Doctrine, Fed. Cir. B.J. Vol. 18, No. 2 (2009); Hatch-Waxman Litigation, Chapter 7 (re settlements), Patent Lit. Strategies (BNA 2005–10); Chapter 3, Looking Back Over the Patent/Antitrust Interface, Perspective on the Human Genome Project (Vol. 50 Advances in Genetics 2004); Patent Scope and Competition: Is the Federal Circuit's Approach Correct?, 7 VA. J.L. & Tech. 3 (Spring 2002).
Mr. Sobel has delivered well over 100 lectures at continuing legal education programs at bar associations and law schools on litigation, patent, antitrust, licensing, ADR, jury trials and trade secrets topics. He testified at the FTC hearings on the patent-antitrust interface and before congressional committees on the antitrust legislation concerning joint research.