Skip to main content

Patent Litigation 2015

Speaker(s): Carolyn H. Blankenship, Charles R. Wolfe, Jr., Eric J. Lobenfeld, Gene W. Lee, George E. Badenoch, Gerard A. Haddad, Heather A. Faltin, Hon. Mary Pat Thynge, Hon. Peter J. Messitte, Hon. Rubén Castillo, James Wodarski, Nicholas K. Mitrokostas, Paul R. Gupta, Philip Green, Richard F. Martinelli, Richard W. Erwine, Robert Gilman, Thomas F. Maffei, William M. Jay
Recorded on: Nov. 16, 2015
PLI Program #: 59495

Hon. Peter J. Messitte

District Judge

United States District Court for the District of Maryland


District Judge Peter J. Messitte was born in Washington, D.C. in 1941. He attained academic distinction when he received his bachelor’s degree cum laude from Amherst College in 1963. He continued his education at the University of Chicago Law School where he obtained a law degree in 1966. While at the University of Chicago Law School, Judge Messitte won first prize in the Karl Llewelyn Moot Court Competition in 1965.

Immediately after law school graduation, Judge Messitte joined the Peace Corps as a volunteer and was stationed in Sao Paulo, Brazil until 1968. Upon his return to the States, he entered the private practice of law, first in Washington, D. C. from 1969 to 1971, and then in Chevy Chase, Maryland from 1971 to 1985. From 1985 to 1993, Judge Messitte served as an Associate Judge of the Circuit Court of Maryland, Sixth Judicial Circuit. Judge Messitte was nominated as a United States District Judge by President Clinton on August 6, 1993. His appointment was confirmed by the United States Senate on October 18, 1993, and on October 20, 1993, Judge Messitte received his commission. He took senior status on September 1, 2008, but continues to carry a full caseload.

Judge Messitte is a member of various professional organizations, including the Montgomery County, Maryland, District of Columbia, American and Federal Bar Associations. He is also a Bencher of the Montgomery County Inn of Court, which he founded and a member of the American Law Institute; he was Vice-President and General Counsel, Community Psychiatric Clinic, 1975-85; and Delegate to the Democratic Party National Convention (Chair of Uncommitted Delegate Caucus), 1980. Among the awards he has received are the Distinguished Alumnus Award, Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School, 1984; the Elizabeth Scull Award for outstanding community service to Montgomery County, 1993; the Century of Service Award for Contributions to the Administration of Justice, Bar Association of Montgomery County, Maryland, 1999; the H. Vernon Eney Endowment Fund Award for Contributions to the Administration of Justice, Maryland Bar Foundation, 2001; the Gran Cruz da Ordem de São José Operário for Judicial Merit in the Field of Labor Law, Tribunal Regional do Trabalho, Mato Grosso, Brazil, 2001; the Medalha de Mérito Acadêmico, Academia Paulista de Magistrados, for Academic Contributions to the Brazilian Judiciary, 2002 and 2009; the Jon Mills Award for Significant Contributions to Relations Between Florida and the Americas, University of Florida Levin College of Law, 2009; Medal of Commendation, Sao Paulo Academy of Magistrates, 2009; Honorary Citizen of the Cities of São Paulo, Riberão Preto, and Uberlândia, Brazil, in recognition of work with the Judiciary of Brazil; and the Leadership in Law Award, Daily Record (Maryland), 2002.

Judge Messitte was a member of the International Judicial Relations Committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States between 1997 and 2003, where he chaired the Working Group for Latin America and the Caribbean. He has served as a consultant on judicial reform projects throughout Latin America and Africa, and Turkey and has published articles on a wide variety of legal topics, many of which have appeared in journals throughout Latin America.


Vanderbilt University (JD)

George Washington University (BA)



James focuses his practice on patent disputes in the International Trade Commission (ITC), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and Federal District Courts. He has also appeared before the First and Second Circuit courts as part of his appellate work at the state and federal levels. A patent litigator with extensive experience, James has handled disputes involving a variety of technologies, including smartphones, core processor circuits, digital imaging software, telecommunications devices, and LED lighting systems.

A trial lawyer with 20 years of complex civil litigation experience, James has also represented clients in complex business litigation, white collar crime, insurance coverage, federal securities actions, trademark ownership of mass media and literary titles, complex insurance coverage, and the First Amendment.

James returns to Mintz Levin after working as a partner with Pepper Hamilton LLP. He has also served as an assistant district attorney in Hampden County, Massachusetts.

Representative Matters

International Trade Commission

  • Certain LED Photographic Lighting Devices and Components Thereof (337-TA-804) Represented California-based complainant (plaintiff) and its UK parent, companies that make LED lighting systems for use in film and TV production, at the International Trade Commission. The ITC handed down its Final Initial Determination of infringement on September 7, 2012. On January 17, 2013, the ITC issued a General Exclusion Order (GEO) against respondents (defendants) based in both China and the United States. The result in this case is particularly notable because it is rare for the ITC to issue a GEO. It is much more common for complainants to seek and receive a Limited Exclusion Order from the court due to the rigorous criteria and careful balancing of interests that apply to requests for GEOs.
  • Certain Portable Communication Devices (337-TA-827) Represented complainant in the ITC and as plaintiff in multiple parallel District of Delaware cases. Successfully licensed all respondents, including some of the largest and most recognized names in the converged device space – Amazon, LG, Motorola, Pantech Wireless, Research in Motion, Sony, and more. Cases were filed in December 2011 and settled in May 2012.
  • Certain Electronic Imaging Devices (337-TA-726) Represented complainant in this three-patent ITC case. Filed in June 2010 against converged device manufacturers and focused on digital camera technology found in cell phones, laptop computers, and personal digital assistants, the matter was fully settled in April 2011. The result was successful licensing programs with three out of four respondents, among which are recognized leaders in the electronics device manufacturing space – HTC, LG, Research in Motion, and more.

Charles Wolfe concentrates his practice in patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret litigation, licensing and counseling.  He has extensive experience representing clients before U.S. courts, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the U.S. Copyright Office. His experience includes:

  • managing large U.S. and international patent portfolios
  • prosecuting patent applications, reissue applications, ex parte and inter partes re-examinations and interference proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
  • counseling on patent infringement, validity and enforceability and related issues
  • prosecuting and defending patent infringement actions before U.S. district courts and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • technology licensing and due diligence investigating

Prior to entering private practice, Mr. Wolfe served as a patent examiner for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Mr. Wolfe has received the highest possible rating from Martindale-Hubbell.

Representative Matters

  • IP counsel to global manufacturer of electrical connectors for communications, industrial, medical, and military markets
  • IP counsel to global manufacturer of component and subsystem devices for automotive communications, aerospace, rail and other transportation industries and industrial applications
  • Litigation counsel to generic pharmaceutical companies in Paragraph IV Hatch-Waxman patent infringement actions

Bar Admissions

District of Columbia
Supreme Court of the United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court - District of Columbia
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
U.S. District Court - Eastern District of Virginia
U.S. District Court - Western District of Virginia
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office


Member, American Bar Association
Member, American Intellectual Property Law Association
Member, Bar Association of the District of Columbia
Member, Virginia Bar Association


Georgetown University Law Center, JD
Lehigh University, BS, summa cum laude

Chief Judge Rubén Castillo of Chicago, Illinois, received his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Loyola University Chicago in 1976 and his law degree from Northwestern University School of Law in 1979.

On January 27, 1994, President Clinton nominated Chief Judge Castillo to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois as an Article III federal judge.  In 1999, President Clinton nominated him to be the vice-chair of the United States Sentencing Commission.  Chief Judge Castillo has also served as an adjunct professor of trial advocacy at Northwestern University School of Law for more than twenty years.  As a result of his work with students, he has received five teaching awards from Northwestern Law students.

On July 1, 2013, he assumed the position of Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  Chief Judge Castillo heads the Patent Pilot Program for the Northern District of Illinois and is a participating judge.

Eric Lobenfeld's philosophy is to prepare each case as if it is going to trial. That puts the client in the strongest position to resolve the case, whether through settlement or through litigation to judgment.

Eric's work focuses on technology and life science intellectual property disputes. He has more than three decades of experience as a first-chair trial lawyer in patent, trademark, copyright, antitrust, unfair competition, and complex commercial cases. These include jury and non-jury trials in state and federal courts throughout the United States, as well as arbitrations and arguments in numerous state and federal appeals. He also handles post-grant review proceedings in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office and has participated in Markman claim construction proceedings for more than 50 patents.

Eric represents companies in many industries, including computer hardware and software, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, bar code scanners and Radio Frequency Identification technology, Automated Teller Machines and web-enabled kiosks, semiconductor technology, television and motion picture technology, home and industrial lighting, and consumer electronics.

Eric is a regular panelist in the Practising Law Institute's annual two-day patent litigation program, where he has presented on expert issues and damages issues. He has also given a demonstration of a closing argument in a patent jury trial.

Gene Lee is an experienced lead counsel in patent litigations who is known for his thoughtful work and dedication to clients. In addition to patent litigation in the federal courts and the U.S. International Trade Commission, he regularly works on Patent Trial and Appeal Board trials, and also trade secret, copyright, trademark, unfair competition, and licensing disputes. Beyond adversarial matters, he also advises clients on licensing, patent portfolio analysis, and the IP aspects of corporate transactions.

Gene’s work has covered a wide range of technologies, including computer systems and software, telecommunications and wireless communications, medical devices, video games, audio processing, pharmaceuticals, financial services, chemistry, semiconductors and geoscience.

He has represented major U.S. and Asian companies in high-stakes disputes. Gene represented through trial the world’s largest alcoholic beverages company in the first investigation in the USITC pilot program for potential early disposition of cases. He also represented Taiwan’s first innovator drug company in a licensing dispute and supported related litigation in Taiwan regarding ownership of patent rights.

Gene is a Director of the PTAB Bar Association and the NY Intellectual Property Lawyers Association.

George has over 30 years’ experience in litigations and adversarial matters concerning all aspects of intellectual property, including patents, trade secrets, trademarks and copyrights.

George has had considerable experience in major patent litigations (jury and non-jury) involving computers, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, with particular emphasis on computerized automatic machinery and equipment and automobile parts. His successful trial of a major patent jury case involving computerized equipment for custom designed ductwork led to the largest intellectual property judgment nationwide in that year. His role as lead defense counsel for a large group of automobile importers led to the dismissal of a much publicized case brought by an alleged inventor of intermittent windshield wipers, even though the same plaintiff had previously secured multi-million dollar verdicts against two of Detroit’s big three automobile manufacturers.

George also counsels clients in patent and other intellectual property licensing matters, and has been involved in the licensing aspects of large merger and acquisition transactions.

George has been recognized as a leading lawyer in the IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners (2013), which ranked him in the top tiers in New York for both “Licensing” and “Litigation;” The International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers(2013, 2014); New York Super Lawyers (2007, 2009-2016), and The US Legal 500 for his work in the area of “IP – Patent Licensing and Transactional” (2014, 2015) and Patent Litigation (2015, 2016).

He has spoken before domestic and international bar association groups, authored brochures advising the Japanese community on patent matters and appeared on a number of panels teaching licensing and patent litigation matters to other lawyers sponsored by the Practicing Law Institute and the American Conference Institute.

Gerard Haddad joined Dickstein Shapiro’s New York office in 2008 as a partner in the Intellectual Property Practice. He focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation and counseling.  Gerry has litigated patents in the fields of computer software and hardware, medical devices, pharmaceuticals and telecommunications; rendered opinions on non-infringement, invalidity, and inequitable conduct; and advised companies on their intellectual property rights. Gerry also has performed due diligence investigations for mergers and acquisitions and has litigated copyright and trademark disputes.

Prior to joining Dickstein Shapiro, Gerry was a partner in Morgan & Finnegan LLP’s intellectual property group.

Nicholas Mitrokostas, a partner in Goodwin Procter’s IP Litigation Group, focuses his practice on commercial litigation, with a particular emphasis on intellectual property and patent litigation. Mr. Mitrokostas has extensive trial experience representing clients in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries in patent and antitrust litigation. He also has experience counseling and representing higher educational institutions in litigation. Mr. Mitrokostas also devotes a significant amount of time representing pro bono clients in criminal and immigration matters.

Work For Clients:

Mr. Mitrokostas’ recent representations include:

  • Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.: Representing Teva Pharmaceuticals in a significant patent litigation involving Teva’s blockbuster branded product, Copaxone®, the most prescribed treatment for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. The court ruled that Teva’s nine patents were valid, enforceable and infringed by the defendants’ ANDAs, which was partially upheld on appeal. The case was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on October 15, 2014.
  • Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. v. Perrigo, Inc.: Represented Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. in patent litigation involving its inhaler, ProAir® HFA, the most widely prescribed albuterol sulfate metered-dose inhaler. The case was settled favorably.
  • Cephalon, Inc. v. Eagle Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (and related cases): Representing Cephalon, Inc. in patent litigation against 18 defendants involving Teva’s branded cancer drug, Treanda®, which is indicated for the treatment of certain lymphomas. The actions are pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware before Judge Gregory M. Sleet.
  • Mass. Inst. Tech. v. Shire: Representing M.I.T. in litigation involving infringement of patents relating to novel cellular-scaffolds discovered by Professors Bob Langer and Jay Vacanti. The action is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
  • Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc.: Represented Teva Pharmaceuticals USA as ANDA-defendant in patent litigation involving Pfizer’s products, Detrol® and Detrol® LA. The case was settled favorably.
  • Cephalon, Inc. v. Celgene, Corp.: Represented Cephalon, Inc. in patent infringement litigation involving a paclitaxel drug formulation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The action is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
  • Genzyme, Inc. v. Anika Therapeutics, Inc.: Represented medical device company, Anika Therapeutics, Inc., which was sued for patent infringement relating to its proposed hyaluronic acid injection therapy, Monovisc®, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

Mr. Mitrokostas also served as one of several attorneys at Goodwin Procter working on matters related to the criminal investigation and prosecution following the July 2006 Central Artery Tunnel collapse in Boston.

Phil Green is one of the four founding Principals of Hoffman Alvary. For over twenty years, his practice has focused on intellectual property, valuation and business consulting areas. Throughout his career he has valued technical and other types of intangibles in broad range of industries including: computer software and hardware, pharmaceutical, banking, insurance, automotive and other manufacturers as well as service organizations. His clients have ranged from Fortune 100 companies, to educational institutions and individual inventors and start-up entities. He has testified in trials in state and federal courts on over 40 occasions throughout the country.

Prior to starting Hoffman Alvary in 1996, Mr. Green was a senior manager at Price Waterhouse LLP.  Mr. Green is a licensed Certified Public Accountant and an Accredited Senior Appraiser in Business Valuation by the American Society of Appraisers.

Rich Martinelli develops comprehensive IP strategies which resolve immediate legal needs and safeguard long-term business objectives. He handles all aspects of intellectual property, particularly patent litigation, patent prosecution and client counseling. Rich is also a leader of Orrick’s Artificial Intelligence Practice.

He has litigated patents at trial, before the ITC, and on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Rich has counseled clients and rendered opinions on patent validity, infringement and freedom to use. He is a registered patent attorney with experience drafting patents and practicing before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Rich also helps companies address the novel litigation and transactional IP issues that arise when developing and working with AI and is a frequent lecturer on these topics.

Rich’s patent work has involved a wide range of technologies including image processing, 3d graphics, audio / video compression, computer hardware and software, e-commerce, network technologies, digital rights management and encryption.

Richard W. Erwine is a partner in Quinn Emanuel’s New York Office.  Richard’s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation with a particular emphasis on patent litigation.  Based on his electrical engineering degree, Richard often represents computer hardware and software companies.  Richard has litigated substantial matters for clients such as IBM, Samsung, Google, Sony, Motorola, and Covidien.  In connection with such matters, Richard has successfully obtained resolutions by way of summary judgment, dismissal, and/or settlement following favorable claim construction rulings or other pretrial proceedings. 

Notable Representations

Representing Samsung in a patent infringement action in the Northern District of California involving smartphone technology.

Representing MotionPoint in a patent infringement action in the Northern District of California involving web site translation software.

Representing Funai and MediaTek in an International Trade Commission Investigation involving MPEG and Wi-Fi technology.

Represented Motorola in a patent infringement action in the Northern District of Illinois involving several patents covering a multitude of disparate technologies.

Represented Respondent Cablevision in an International Trade Commission Investigation involving five set top box patents.  The International Trade Commission terminated the Investigation in September 2011 – a complete victory for Cablevision.

Represented Plaintiff Tyco Healthcare in a patent infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas in which the jury found Tyco Healthcare’s patents to be valid and infringed by Defendant Applied Medical Resources Corp.

Represented Samsung in a patent infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas involving turbo decoding for wireless communications.  Obtained a favorable resolution by way of settlement.

Represented IBM in a patent infringement action in the Southern District of California involving four patents covering four disparate technologies.  Obtained a favorable resolution by way of settlement.

Represented IBM in a complex action in the Southern District of New York involving several allegations, including assertion of ten patents related to mainframe computers.  District court granted summary judgment in favor of IBM.

Represented MediaTek in a multi-patent litigation involving HDTV communications and digital signal processing.  Obtained a favorable resolution by way of settlement.

Defended Third Wave Technologies in a patent litigation in the Western District of Wisconsin related to Hepatitis C diagnostic tools.  Negotiated a favorable settlement for Third Wave.

Thomas F. Maffei is a litigation partner at the Boston law firm of Sherin & Lodgen LLP. Mr. Maffei represents professionals in civil litigation matters, including physicians, architects, engineers, law firms and lawyers. He has extensive experience advising law firms and lawyers in ethics matters and in representing them in bar disciplinary matters. As a former member of the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers, Mr. Maffei frequently speaks on lawyer ethics issues.  He also has testified as an expert witness on professional liability and legal ethics issues in civil cases. Mr. Maffei often mediates disputes involving lawyers. Mr. Maffei is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and is listed in Top 100 New England Super Lawyers, New England’s Best Lawyers and The Best Lawyers in America.  He is also a past president of the Massachusetts Bar Association.

For more than twenty-five years, Mr. Maffei has taught the required course in professional responsibility at Boston College Law School.  Prior to joining Sherin & Lodgen LLP, Tom practiced law at his own firm, Griesinger, Tighe & Maffei, LLP. Prior to June 2000, he spent almost thirty years at one of Boston’s large law firms, where he was a partner in litigation. 

Mr. Maffei is a graduate of Boston College and Boston College Law School.  Following graduation from law school, he served as law clerk to the Honorable Edward F. Hennessy, Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.

As stated in Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business, Paul "litigates cases involving hi-tech electronic, software and internet-related patents." Chambers USA added that he is “an expert in cybersecurity.” His clients include industry leaders in e-commerce, IT, financial services and telecom.

Paul, according to Chambers USA, is "a zealous advocate for his clients," "praised as a great negotiator” and “a strong strategist,” “renowned for his work in the technology arena" and "extraordinarily accessible." He is also listed as a notable lawyer in Super Lawyers and in IAM’s "World's Leading Patent Practitioners."

He regularly handles intellectual property litigation (including patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret cases), as well as commercial litigation (including cybersecurity, licensing, outsourcing and indemnity cases).

He is currently or has recently been lead counsel in Federal District Court actions and arbitrations pending in California, Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. He also counsels clients throughout the United States on a variety of technology law matters.

Further biographical information about Paul can be found in Who’s Who in the World.

Bob has extensive experience litigating complex patent cases throughout the United States. His cases involve diverse technologies, including database and application software, network hardware and software, GPS devices, laser printing, electrical circuitry, medical devices, and consumer products. His experience also includes trademark and other complex business litigation. Bob has been involved in all phases of the litigation process, from pre-suit investigations through claim construction, trials and appeals. Clients have also asked Bob to utilize his litigation experience in evaluating patent portfolios for licensing or enforcement.

Bob was formerly a partner at the law firm Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris Glovsky and Popeo P.C. During law school, he gained courtroom experience as a student prosecutor in the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office and as a clerk in the Drug Task Force Unit of the United States Attorney’s Office.

Bob is admitted to practice in Massachusetts, and before the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and has been admitted pro hac vice in courts throughout the country.


Boston College, 1992 B.A.

Suffolk University Law School, J.D.  1999

Bar Admissions

  • Massachusetts
  • United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Carolyn H. Blankenship is General Counsel, Innovation & Product for Thomson Reuters.  She joined Reuters in 2001 and before that held a variety of IP-related positions as both in-house and outside counsel, including stints at Skadden, Arps and

Carolyn’s practice focuses on fostering innovation and protecting those innovations throughout the company.  In addition, Carolyn oversees all patent litigation and supports the IP aspects of the company’s M&A activity. 

As an undergraduate, Carolyn attended the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for two years and went on to earn a B.A. in Biology from Harvard College.  She has a J.D. from Arizona State University College of Law and clerked for the Hon. Noel Fidel of the Arizona State Court of Appeals.

Heather Faltin is the Senior Patent Counsel at Comcast Cable Communications.  Prior to joining Comcast, Ms. Faltin's was an associate in private practice.  Her practice focused on intellectual property litigation, with a particular emphasis on patent litigation.  She has represented clients from a variety of industries, ranging from telecommunications to medical devices.

Ms. Faltin received her J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law in 2004.  During law school, she served on the editorial board of the Virginia Journal of Law and Technology.  She received a B.S. in Physics (magna cum laude) from the College of William and Mary in 2000.

Ms. Faltin is admitted to practice in Virginia, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia and before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Judge Mary Pat Thynge has served as a Magistrate Judge of the U.S. District Court of the District of Delaware since June 1992, and currently serves as its Chief Magistrate Judge. Prior to joining the bench, Judge Thynge was the managing attorney for the Wilmington office of the law firm of White & Williams. Previously, she was associated with the law firm of Biggs & Battaglia. Judge Thynge is a member of the Federal Magistrate Judges Association and serves on its Board as the Third Circuit Representative, on its Civil/Criminal Federal Rules Review Committee and as its Membership Chair. Since 2004, she has served as Executive Editor for the Federal Courts Law Review.

Since her elevation to the bench, Judge Thynge has developed and managed the ADR program of the District Court in Delaware and has been actively involved in continuing legal education programs, primarily regarding ADR, the Federal and Local Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence. She has mediated over 1400 cases, of which more than 500 matters involved patent disputes. She authored the chapter Mediation: One Judge’s Perspective (Or Infusing Sanity into Intellectual Property Litigation) in the book ADR ADVOCACY STRATEGIES AND PRACTICE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES 2011.

Willy Jay is a partner in the firm’s Litigation Department and a co-chair of its Appellate Litigation Practice. A former Assistant to the Solicitor General, Mr. Jay has extensive experience with litigation in the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Courts of Appeals. He has argued 11 cases before the Supreme Court, briefed more than 20 cases on the merits and briefed more than 150 cases at the certiorari stage. He also has significant experience with cases in the Court’s original jurisdiction.

Mr. Jay has handled cases in every federal court of appeals as well. He has personally briefed or argued more than 30 appellate cases, both in private practice and on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Environment, Criminal and Civil Divisions, and he has participated in numerous appellate matters involving government appeals or amicus participation.

Mr. Jay has particular experience in cases involving federal preemption of state law, environmental law, class action practice, and the First Amendment, including those involving campaign finance regulation, election law and constitutional challenges to public-corruption prosecutions.


Since joining Goodwin Procter, Mr. Jay has handled complex litigation matters in the Supreme Court; in the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh, D.C., and Federal Circuits; and in various trial courts and administrative agencies. His recent significant representations include:

  • Successfully winning rehearing en banc in the First Circuit on behalf of a national bank in a putative nationwide class action, and co-authoring briefs that won a complete victory on rehearing en banc.
  • Briefing and orally arguing several significant issues of standing and timeliness under the Securities Act in the Fourth Circuit.

Prior to joining Goodwin Procter in 2012, Mr. Jay served for five years as Assistant to the Solicitor General at the U.S. Department of Justice. In that capacity, he handled Supreme Court and appellate matters for a wide variety of federal agencies, including every Cabinet Department and numerous executive and independent agencies. Previously, he was a litigation associate with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in its Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group.


Mr. Jay is admitted to practice in the District of Columbia, in Virginia (inactive), and before numerous federal appellate courts.


As Assistant to the Solicitor General, Mr. Jay received the Attorney General’s Distinguished Service Award for his work on litigation arising from the bankruptcy of Chrysler, as well as a Special Commendation from the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division for his work on litigation involving oil drilling, invasive species and interstate water rights.

While in law school, Mr. Jay was executive editor of the Harvard Law Review.

J.D., 2001
Harvard Law School
(magna cum laude)

A.B., 1998
Harvard College
(magna cum laude)


2004-2005 U.S. Supreme Court, Honorable Antonin Scalia

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Honorable Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain