Bio
In his over 35-year career as a patent litigator, Mr. Pezzano has successfully tried patent infringement cases on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants involving technology innovation across a diverse range of industries—particularly consumer, recreational, and pharmaceutical products; chemical and petroleum products and processes; wireless telecommunication devices and equipment; computer software, hardware, and systems; video and audio broadcast equipment, systems, and networks; and printing engines and systems. He has appeared in numerous federal district court trials, including both bench and jury trials, and International Trade Commission (ITC) Section 337 Hearings.
Tony’s success is no less significant in representing plaintiffs in trademark infringement, counterfeit infringement, dilution, unfair competition and false advertising cases in federal district courts throughout the country and ITC Section 337 investigations. Tony has obtained numerous permanent injunctions, preliminary injunctions and temporary restraining orders for clients in a wide range of industries, including childcare services, cell phone chargers, dumpster rentals, restaurants and Boba Tea.
One of Tony's major areas of focus has been his representation of brand pharmaceutical companies in suits against generic drug companies under the Hatch-Waxman Act. He has served as lead counsel for brand pharmaceutical companies in over two dozen filed Hatch-Waxman cases involving antibiotic, antifungal, treatment of asthma, treatment of male pattern baldness, anti-organ transplant rejection, and antiviral and anti-coagulant drug products.
ITC Section 337 investigations are another of Tony’s major focuses. He has successfully represented both Complainants and Respondents in ITC Section 337 investigations involving lithium batteries, biologics, SeaDoos/WaveRunners, wireless communication devices, including mobile phones and tablets, computer routers, Segway/hoverboards, eye cosmetics and synthetic braiding hair. Tony is a Past President (2009) of the ITC Trial Lawyers Association.
Tony also has successfully represented companies in a variety of Customs and Border Protection, PTAB and TTAB Proceedings, and defended companies in a variety of different industries against patent trolls receiving favorable press (e.g., IPWatchdog® (March 9, 2022) for his creative strategies in such cases.
Many significant companies around the world have called on Tony for representation in large-scale patent litigations in the federal district courts and ITC. Few attorneys, if any, can match Tony’s record of obtaining numerous temporary restraining orders and preliminary and permanent injunctions in federal district court cases as well as exclusion, cease and desist and consent orders and default judgments in ITC Section 337 investigations.
Tony has also prosecuted patent and trademark applications and rendered opinions and counseling for US and foreign corporate clients involving intellectual property matters.
Tony has been a frequent author and lecturer on patent litigation topics, including Hatch-Waxman and biopharma patent litigation, FRAND-Encumbered Standard Essential Patents, and ITC Section 337 investigations. He has been consistently ranked in the Legal 500 US and listed in the prestigious IAM Patent 1000, which called him a "top-notch and untiring litigator… the first in the door and the last out." He was named to the Best Lawyers in America list in 2023.
Representative Federal District Court Litigation
Representative Federal District Court Litigation
- LensDigital, LLC, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. JER Custom Designs, Inc. and Jason Earl Rife, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs and. Engraving Machines Plus Corp., Boss Laser LLC, Robin Faro, Jason Montello, Lobo Designs LLC, Kowalski Designs LLC, Mycup.lo LLC, Stanley Althshuller, Designs By Hope Yoder, Inc. and Sechelski Creations LLC, Counterclaim Defendants, Civil Action No. 3:24-cv-00798—RKE-LLL (M.D. Fla.): Lead counsel representing Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs JER Custom Designs, Inc. and Jason Earl Rife in pending patent infringement, unfair competition, false advertising and trade libel action involving rotary laser engraving devices.
- Anker Innovations Technology Co. Ltd., et al. v. Beijing Seven Talents Technology Co. Ltd., et al., Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-15663-SJC (N.D. Ill.). Lead counsel representing Plaintiff Anker Innovations Limited in pending patent and trademark action involving home security systems.
- Guangzhou Chaoyan Technology Co. Ltd. v. Anker Innovations Limited, Civil Action No. 2:25-cv-02635-RSM (W.D. Wash.). Lead counsel representing Defendant Anker Innovations Limited in pending patent and trademark action involving home security systems.
- JBS Hair, Inc. v. Sun Taiyang Co., Ltd. and Beauty Elements, Corp., 1:21-cv-01857 and 1:21-cv-01859-MLB (ND Ga): Lead counsel representing Plaintiff JBS Hair, Inc. in pending patent infringement action involving synthetic pre-stretched braiding hair products.
- JBS Hair, Inc. v. SLI Production Corp., Hair Zone, Inc. and Beauty Essence, Inc., 2:22-cv-01576, 2:22-cv-01577, and 2:22-cv-01769-SRC-AME (DNJ): Lead counsel representing Plaintiff JBS Hair, Inc. in pending patent infringement action involving synthetic pre-stretched braiding hair products.
- JBS Hair, Inc. v. SLI Production Corp., Hair Zone, Inc. and Beauty Essence, Inc., 2:22-cv-01576, 2:22-cv-01577, and 2:22-cv-01769-SRC-AME (DNJ): Lead counsel representing Plaintiff JBS Hair, Inc. in pending patent infringement action involving synthetic pre-stretched braiding hair products.
- Westmont Living, Inc. v. Retirement Unlimited, Inc. et al., 3:22-cv-00811-RCY (E.D. Va.): Lead counsel representing Plaintiff in pending trademark infringement action.
- Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. v. Bergforf, et al, 1:24-cv-0883-AS (SDNY): Lead counsel representing Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. in pending trademark infringement and false advertising action.
- Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. v. Kendo Holdings Inc., et al., 3:22-cv-08958-CRB (ND Cal): Lead counsel representing Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. in pending trademark infringement action.
- LensDigital, LLC v. Rife, 3:23-cv-20530-RK-TJB (DNJ) and 3:24-cv-00798-MMH-LLC (MDFl): Lead counsel representing Defendant Rife in favorable transfer of design patent case to MD Florida following by dismissal.
- Playground AI LLC v. Mighty Computing, Inc. and Suhail Doshi, 5:23-cv-05181-BLF (ND Cal.): Lead counsel representing Defendants Mighty Computing, Inc. and Suhail Doshi in favorable settlement of trademark infringement and unfair competition action.
- Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. v. L’Oreal USA S/D, Inc., et al., 1:24-cv-01240-MMG (SDNY): Lead counsel representing Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. in favorable settlement of trademark infringement action.
- Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. v. Grande Cosmetics, LLC, et al., 1:24-cv-01276-CM (SDNY): Lead counsel representing Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. in favorable settlement of trademark infringement action.
- Amarte USA Holding, Inc. v. Mini Mani Moo L.L.C., et al., 1:24-cv-03487-JSR (SDNY): Lead counsel representing Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. in favorable settlement of trademark infringement action.
- FamiCordTx, S.A. and Polski Bank Komorek Macierzystych sp. z.o.o. v. iCell Gene Therapeutics, Inc., 23-cv-7198 (E.D.N.Y.): Lead counsel representing Plaintiffs in favorable settlement of fraudulent inducement and material breach of contract action relating to biopharma technology.
- A.L. Enterprises, Inc. v. Electric Eel, Inc., 1:23-cv-07398-LGS (S.D.N.Y.): Local counsel representing Plaintiff in favorable settlement of patent infringement action.
- KF Tea USA, Inc. and KF Tea Franchising LLC v. Tea N’ Boba, Toan Nguyen and Vy Nguyen, Civil Action No. 7:24-cv-00001-O (N.D. Tex. 2023-24): Lead counsel represented Plaintiffs in trademark infringement, counterfeiting, unfair competition, dilution, false advertising, unjust enrichment and breach of franchise agreement action; Stipulated Order For Permanent Injunction (D.I.38) granted.
- Anker Innovations Technology Co., Ltd. and Anker Innovations Limited v. Awker, Inc., Jianjun Xue and Lee Austin, 1:23-cv-07855-VEC (S.D.N.Y. 2023-24): Lead counsel represented Plaintiffs in trademark infringement, counterfeiting, unfair competition and false advertising action; Stipulated Order For Permanent Injunction (D.I.38) granted.
- Black’s 14th Street LLC v. Pearl Dive Oyster Bar LLC, Civil Action No. 6:23-cv-788-ADA (W.D. Tex. 2023-24): Lead counsel represented Plaintiff in trademark infringement, unfair competition, false designation of origin and unjust enrichment action; Temporary Restraining Order (D.I.11) granted.
- Patent Armory Inc. v. OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., 6:23-cv-00327-ADA (W.D. Tex. 2023-24): Lead counsel represented Defendant in patent infringement action; all claims dismissed with prejudice based on covenant not to sue.
- RecepTrexx LLC v. OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., 6:23-cv-00486-OLG (W.D. Tex. 2023-24): Lead counsel represented Defendant in patent infringement action; all claims dismissed with prejudice based on covenant not to sue.
- Next Day Dumpsters DMV, LLC v. Paramount Property Services, LLC, 1:23-cv-843-AJT-LRV (E.D.Va. 2023): Lead counsel represented Plaintiff in trademark infringement action; Temporary Restraining Order (D.I.17) and Preliminary Injunction Order (D.I.63) granted.
- Wee Care Nanny Agency, LLC v. WeeCare, Inc., 1:23-cv-02117-AT (S.D.N.Y. 2023): Lead counsel represented Plaintiff in trademark infringement action; Order to Show Cause (D.I.22) For Entry of Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (D.I.58) granted.
- S&J Wholesale, LLC et al. v. Ruifang (Seller ID: A39F691W77H648) et al., 23-cv-00610 (Circuit Court Hamilton County, Tennessee 2023): Lead counsel represented Defendant in voluntary dismissal of action for trade secret misappropriation and restoring defendant’s listing and sale of teleprompter products on Amazon.
- Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Dexon Computer, Inc. v. Wisecom Technologies Inc. et al., 3:20-cv-04926-CRB (Third Party Complaint) (N.D. Cal. 2023): Lead counsel represented Wisecom Technologies Inc. in dismissing third party complaint based on motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction followed by voluntary dismissal.
- Advanced Transactions, LLC v. Regis Corporation, Supercuts, Inc., and Supercuts Corporate Shops, Inc. dba, Supercuts, Cost Cutters, Roosters, and Smartstyle, 6:22-cv-00926-ADA-DGT, W.D. Tex. 2022: Lead counsel represented Defendants in dismissing patent infringement action brought by Plaintiff Advanced Transactions, LLC asserting eight patents directed to methods and systems using a computer to perform electronic marketing. All claims have been dismissed with prejudice based on a covenant not to sue with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing by either side.
- Evertz Microsystems Ltd. v. Lawo Inc., Lawo Corp., and Lawo AG, 19-cv-302, MN, JLH, D. Del. 2019 – 2022: Lead counsel represented Defendants; Parties limited to the following public statement: “After several years of litigation, the parties have mutually agreed to settle the litigation pending between them in the United States Court for the District of Delaware. All claims have been dismissed with prejudice with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing by either side.”
- iFixit Corporation v. Locket IP LLC, 2:22-cv-05731 (C.D. Cal. 2022): Lead counsel represented Plaintiff in dismissing declaratory judgment action for noninfringement and invalidity of asserted patent directed to a method using a computer for locating regions of interest in a user interface based on settlement.
- Hawaii Life Real Estate Services, LLC v. Locket IP LLC, 1:22-cv-00080, D. Hawaii 2022: Lead counsel represented Plaintiff in dismissing declaratory judgment action for noninfringement and invalidity of asserted patent directed to a method using a computer for locating regions of interest in a user interface; received favorable press in IPWatchdog®, March 9, 2022.
- Shuangma Plastic Co., Ltd. v. Chef’n Corp., Tupperware Brands Corp. and Tupperware U.S. Inc., 2:20-cv-01603-BJR (W.D. Wash. 2021): Lead counsel represented Plaintiff in dismissing with prejudice declaratory judgment action for noninfringement and invalidity of asserted patent, directed to hand-held food processor, and all counterclaims asserted by Defendants based on favorable settlement and reinstatement of accused products for sale on Amazon.
- Anton International, Inc. v. Ningbo MIzhihe Import & Export Co., Ltd., 5:21-cv-124 (C.D. Cal. 2021): Lead counsel represented Defendant in successfully dismissing with prejudice action for copyright infringement, with respect to accused costumes, based on favorable settlement.
- Unicorn Global, Inc., Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd., And Shenzen Uni-Sun Electronic Co., Ltd. v. Golabs, Inc., d/b/a Gotrax, Walmart, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC, And Walmart.Com USA LLC, Civil Action No. 3:19-CV-00754-N (N.D. Tex. 2019-2021) and Civil Action No. 3:20-CV-02023 (N.D. Tex. 2020-2021) and Golabs Inc. v. Unicorn Global, Inc., Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd., And Shenzen Uni-Sun Electronic Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 3:21-cv-00311 (N.D. Tex. 2021): Lead counsel represented Defendants in favorable settlement of actions involving claims of patent infringement with respect to accused hoverboard products and counterclaims of tortious interference with contractual relationship, unfair competition, Walker Process fraud and sham litigation.
- Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Hospira Inc., 1:14-cv-00915- RGA, 221 F. Supp. 3d 497, D. Del. Oct. 7, 2016, trial opinion, aff’d, 874 F.3d 724, Fed. Cir. 2017, tried before J. Andrews D. Del. 2014-2017: Lead counsel represented Plaintiff; won at bench trial and obtained injunction; Orange Book patent and method of manufacturing patent relating to antibiotic drug Invanz®; affirmed on appeal by Federal Circuit.
- Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Sandoz Inc., 1:14-cv-00916-RCA, D. Del. 2014-2015, antibiotic drug Invanz®: Lead counsel represented Plaintiff; withdrawal of all patent defenses and settlement on highly favorable terms.
- Schering Corp. v. Sandoz, Inc., 11-cv-2589 , FLW, LHG, D.N.J. 2011-2012, antifungal drug Noxafil®: Lead counsel represented Plaintiff; withdrawal of all patent defenses and settlement on highly favorable terms.
- Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v, Apotex Corp. and Apotex Inc., 09-cv-647-PG-ES, D.N.J. 2009, anti-organ rejection drug Cellcept®: Lead counsel represented Plaintiff; following motion for preliminary injunction, Apotex agreed to not commercially launch its accused product prior to expiration of Hoffmann-La Roche's Orange Book patent.
- Roche Palo Alto v. Ranbaxy, tried before J. Wolfson D.N.J. 2008-2009, antiviral drug Valcyte®: Lead counsel represented Plaintiff; stipulated judgment that Orange Book patent valid and infringed.
- Man Roland Inc. v. Goss International Americas, Inc. and Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG, 03-cv-513-SM, D.N.H. 2006-2007: Represented Defendant Heidelberger; successfully dismissed eleven counterclaims for alleged antitrust and unfair competition in case involving printing engines and systems. Lead counsel in drafting all motions that dismissed all eleven counterclaims. See 2006 WL 1575287; 2006 WL 2251675; 2007 WL 764489.
- Hakim v. Canon Avent Group, PLC, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16827 and 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16833 (W.D. La. 2005): Represented Defendant; won on summary judgment that Canon Avent's accused non-spill sippy cup products do not infringe one of the asserted patents and that the second patent is invalid over the prior art. Lead counsel in drafting motion for summary judgment of noninfringement and gave counsel on the second motion for invalidity.
- ISCO International, Inc. v. Conductus, Inc. and Superconductor Technologies, Inc., 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14939 and 279 F. Supp. 2d 489 (D.Del. 2003): Represented Plaintiff in jury trial involving alleged infringement of Plaintiff’s patents directed to base station front end receivers for wireless telecommunication providers. Presented ISCO’s entire damages case to jury.
- Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Genpharm, Inc., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8128, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8124 (D.N.J. 2000) and 50 F. Supp. 2d 367 (D.N.J. 1999): Represented Plaintiff; successfully dismissed antitrust and sham litigation counterclaims in case involving complaint alleging infringement of patents directed to process for manufacturing Ticlid® (ticlopidine hydrochloride) a medication that prevents blood clots, and seeking expedited discovery on the accused process; affirmed on appeal by Federal Circuit. Drafted motions for summary judgment dismissing defendant Genpharm’s counterclaims; see also Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Invamed Inc., 213 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (Represented appellee Roche in appeal affirming order that Roche’s claim for infringement was not unreasonable).
Representative ITC Section 337 Investigations and Customs and Border Protection Proceedings
- Certain Pre-Stretched Synthetic Braiding Hair And Packaging Therefor (II), Inv. No. 337-1457 (“the 1457 Investigation”): Lead counsel representing Complainant JBS Hair, Inc. in pending ITC Section 337 investigation for patent infringement
- Rechargeable Batteries and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-1421. Lead counsel representing Respondents Shenzhen Fbtech Electronics Ltd., Shenzhen LiTime Technology Co., Ltd., Clean Republic SODO LLC, MillerTech Energy Solutions LLC and Relion Battery (Shenzhen) Technology Co. in favorable settlement of ITC Section 337 Investigation involving lithium batteries without issuance of exclusion or cease and desist orders.
- Respondent A-Hair Import Inc.’s Request for Ruling under 19 C.F.R. §177 in Certain Pre-Stretched Synthetic Braiding Hair and Packaging Therefor, Inv. No. 337-TA-1415. Lead counsel representing Complainant JBS Hair, Inc. obtaining favorable ruling from Customs and Border Protection that A-Hair’s alleged re-design falls within the scope of the Commission’s Limited Exclusion Order.
- Certain Pre-Stretched Synthetic Braiding Hair And Packaging Therefor, Inv. No. 337-1415: Lead counsel representing Complainant JBS Hair, Inc. in ITC Section 337 investigation for patent infringement; obtained limited exclusion orders and cease and desist orders against five defaulting Respondents and consent order stipulations and consent orders against seven additional Respondents. After withdrawal of the Complaint, the 1457 Investigation was instituted against the Remaining Respondents.
- Certain Eyecosmetics And Packaging Therefor, Inv. No. 337-1407: Lead counsel representing Amarte USA Holdings, Inc. in pending ITC Section 337 investigation for trademark infringement; obtained limited exclusion orders against four defaulting Respondents and consent orders and settlement agreements against the remaining Respondents.
- Personal Transporters and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1007/1021, hearing before ALJ Shaw ITC 2016-2018: Lead counsel represented Complainants Segway, DEKA and Ninebot; obtained default judgments against seven respondents, termination for cause against one respondent, consent orders against two respondents, favorable settlement with one respondent, and limited exclusion orders and cease-and-desist orders against two respondents after hearing in first consolidated ITC investigation ordered by Commission in a multi-patent and trademark infringement investigation brought against numerous manufacturers of accused imported hoverboards.
- Personal Transporters and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-935 (2015): Lead counsel represented Respondent Ninebot in favorable settlement.
- Wireless Devices Including Mobile Phones and Tablets II, Inv. No. 337-TA-905 (2014): Represented Respondents Nokia Corp. and Nokia, Inc. in favorable settlement.
- CMOS Image Sensors and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-846 (2012): Represented Respondents Nokia Corp. and Nokia, Inc. in favorable settlement.
- Short-Wavelength Light Emitting Diodes, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-640 (2009): Represented Respondent Sony Ericsson, Inc. in favorable settlement.
- Computer Products, Computer Components and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-628, 2008-2009: Represented Complainant IBM; Lead counsel in hearing before ALJ Essex; settled together with parallel district court action to satisfaction of all parties.
- Acetic Acid, Inv. No. 337-TA-633 (2008): Represented Complainant Celanese Int’l Corp. in favorable settlement.
- Lighting Control Devices Including Dimmer Switches and/or Switches and Parts Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-599 (2007): Represented Respondent Control4 in favorable settlement.
- Wireless Communication Devices, Components Thereof and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-583, 2007: Lead counsel represented complainants Ericsson Inc. and Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson; settled to the satisfaction of all parties.
- Products and Pharmaceutical Compositions Containing Recombinant Human Erythropoietin, Inv. No. 337-TA-568, Fed. Reg. Vol. 71, No. 172, ITC 2006-2011: Lead counsel represented Respondents Hoffmann-La Roche family of companies; first 100-day ID procedure initially dismissing patent infringement investigation on summary determination of noninfringement; remanded after rehearing en banc before Federal Circuit, Amgen Inc. v. ITC, 565 F.3d 846, Fed. Cir. 2009; terminated investigation based on global settlement including parallel district court action; no hearing was ever held in ITC; no exclusion order or consent order was ever issued; and settlement allowed respondents to begin selling their accused product, MirCera®, under license.
- Personal Watercraft and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-452, Hearing before ALJ Terrill ITC 2001-2002: Represented Respondent Bombardier; dismissed on summary determination six of eleven asserted patents for noninfringement, invalidity or lack of domestic industry in investigation involving accused SeaDoo® personal watercraft that favorably settled after hearing on remaining five patents.
Representative PTAB and TTAB Proceedings
- Zhiwei Robotics Corp., DBA DFRobot v. Atlas Scientific LLC, No. 92076313 (USPTO TTAB): Representing Petitioner DF Robot in favorable trademark cancellation proceeding with respect to Respondent Atlas Scientific’s registration for the mark GRAVITY for analog pH sensors.
- Shenzhen Fbtech Electronics LTD. et al v. LithiumHub Technologies, LLC; IPR2025-00822 (PTAB) and Shenzhen Fbtech Electronics LTD. et al v. LithiumHub Technologies, LLC; IPR2025-00825 (PTAB). Lead counsel representing lithium battery manufacturers in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings challenging validity of patents directed to circuitry of battery management systems; Filing of the IPRs facilitated settlement and resolution of co-pending ITC proceedings in Rechargeable Batteries and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-1421.
Articles & Publications
- “The Political Pendulum Relating To The Enforcement Of FRAND-Encumbered Standard Essential Patents—Parts I and II,” Intellectual Property Technology Law Journal, January/February 2023
- “Preparing for Competitive Challenges to Biologics With Expiring Exclusivity,” Pharmaceutical Executive, January 31, 2020
- “The ITC As A Forum For Biologic And Biosimilar Patent Disputes,” IAM-Media, May/June 2019
- “Federal Circuit Judges Disagree On Proper Standard For Evaluating Patent Validity Under 35 U.S.C. §103,” Law360 (November 29, 2018)
- “Latest Developments On Injunctive Relief For Infringement Of FRAND-Encumbered SEPs,” Intellectual Property Technology Law Journal, Vol. 26, Nos. 2-4 (February, March, April 2014)
Related Content
View All
Press Releases
Five Lippes Mathias Attorneys Recognized in 2025 Super Lawyers for Oklahoma and New York Metro
November 6, 2025
Press Releases
United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Grants Trademark Cancellation in favor of Lippes Mathias Client DFRobot
June 4, 2024
Events
INTA 2024 Annual Meeting
April 10, 2024
In The news
Lippes Mathias’ Addition of New IP Team Members Highlighted in Law.com’s Midsize Moves Section
March 7, 2024
In The news
Arrival of Four New IP Attorneys Highlighted in World Trademark Review News Digest
March 1, 2024
In The news
Lippes Mathias' Four New IP Attorneys Highlighted in Law360 Article
February 29, 2024
In The news
Lippes Mathias Adds Four-Strong Team in New York
February 26, 2024
Press Releases
Lippes Mathias Broadens its Full-Service Intellectual Property Capabilities with the Addition of an Integrated Group of Attorneys
February 26, 2024
