Matthew Wisnieff is a counsel in Goodwin’s Intellectual Property Litigation practice and represents domestic and foreign clients in complex commercial litigation, focusing on intellectual property disputes as well as matters concerning the intersection of IP and competition law. He regularly represents leading companies across a diverse array of industries, including pharmaceuticals, medical devices, data security and analytics, consumer electronics, and manufacturing.
Among his work, Matthew has successfully litigated numerous high-stakes IP and competition law cases, and his practice covers a wide range of matters, including patent, trademark, trade secret, and copyright disputes, litigation under the Hatch-Waxman and Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Acts, class actions, and IP licensing disputes. Matthew has particular experience litigating standard-essential patent (SEP) and FRAND disputes, as well as the IP aspects of pharmaceutical-antitrust class action litigation.
Matthew also frequently represents clients in IP-related appeals before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Notably, Matthew represented CosmoKey in its successful appeal before the Federal Circuit, winning a rare reversal under the Alice doctrine, and making new law, which Law360 recognized as one of the “Biggest Patent Rulings of 2021.”
As an attorney specializing in complex litigation involving highly technical subject matter, Matthew has extensive experience representing non-governmental organizations in the area of environmental law. Matthew regularly litigates and advises on Clean Water Act enforcement disputes, disputes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and on climate change issues. Notably, Matthew advised parents of New York City public school students in a successful lawsuit seeking redress of PCB contamination in the City’s public school system.
Matthew’s client work includes:
- Representing German data security and cybersecurity firm CosmoKey in patent litigation concerning multi-factor authentication, previously securing a rare victory and reversal under 35 U.S.C. § 101, which Law360 identified as one of the leading patent wins of 2021*
- Represented Abiomed in its complete victory at summary judgment over competing manufacturers in multiple patent litigations seeking to threaten the company’s key product line of implantable heart pumps*
- Represented LG Electronics in a complex commercial litigation brought on an emergency basis regarding SEP/FRAND, IP licensing, and competition law disputes, rapidly resulting in a settlement on favorable terms for our client*
- Represented market research firm NielsenIQ in trade secret litigation concerning data collection and analytics and a related, successful appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit*
- Represented Pfizer in litigation against a competing global pharmaceutical manufacturer regarding alleged trade secret misappropriation issues in the area of multi-conjugate pneumococcal vaccine development*
- Represented Samsung Bioepis in litigation under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act, securing key victories on related Lanham Act issues and defeating proceedings brought under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 seeking broad discovery for use in patent litigations worldwide*
- Represented a leading manufacturer of HIV treatments and antiretroviral therapies in a complex pharmaceutical-antitrust class action concerning the prior settlement of Hatch-Waxman pharmaceutical patent cases*
- Represented one of the world’s leading pharmaceutical companies in a pharmaceutical-antitrust litigation brought by class plaintiffs concerning the prior settlement of Hatch-Waxman pharmaceutical patent litigation in the area of treatments for high cholesterol*
- Represented one of the world’s leading pharmaceutical companies in a pharmaceutical-antitrust litigation brought by direct purchaser, indirect purchaser, and consumer class plaintiffs concerning the prior settlement of Hatch-Waxman pharmaceutical patent litigation concerning treatments for major depressive disorder*
- Represented a leading German pharmaceutical company in a pharmaceutical-antitrust litigation brought by direct and indirect purchaser class plaintiffs concerning the client’s approved antiplatelet agent used as prophylaxis of transient ischemic attack or cerebrovascular accident, securing settlement on favorable terms for our client*
- Represented one of the world’s leading pharmaceutical companies in Hatch-Waxman litigation against 11 generic competitors concerning the client’s approved treatment of major depressive disorder, securing settlement on favorable terms for our client*
- Represented an environmental NGO in litigation against a regional development authority integrated with state agencies concerning pollution at a former U.S. military base under the Clean Water Act, securing a settlement to ensure remediation of the impacted waterways*
Columbia Law School
- New York
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York