Henry C. Dinger P.C.

Henry C. Dinger P.C.

Of CounselDeputy General Counsel and Chair, Ethics Advisory Committee
Henry C. Dinger P.C.
Boston
+1 617 570 1276

Henry Dinger is Of Counsel, Deputy General Counsel and Chair of Goodwin's Ethics Advisory Committee. Mr. Dinger, who joined Goodwin in 1978, focuses on patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret litigation and advising clients concerning a range of intellectual property issues. In recent years, he has concentrated on patent issues in the pharmaceutical industry and on the representation of clients in appellate matters involving patent law, federal jurisdictional issues and First Amendment claims.

Mr. Dinger chairs Goodwin's Ethics Advisory Committee and serves as the firm's Risk Management Partner. He advises Goodwin colleagues and other firms concerning their obligations under the rules of professional conduct, conflict of interest statutes and laws governing the conduct of lobbyists. Mr. Dinger has a long-standing interest in education reform, and currently serves as a director of the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education, a business advocacy group that played a central part in bringing about the landmark Massachusetts Education Reform Act of 1993.

Experience

Mr. Dinger has represented numerous clients in intellectual property and constitutional law matters, including Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Walgreens, J. Baker, Norton Company, Codex Corporation, Walt Disney, MCA Records, Volkswagen AG, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Van Wagner Communications. Much of his practice in recent years has involved the representation of clients in appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and other federal circuit courts. Among the cases that Mr. Dinger has successfully argued are:

  • Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., establishing new Federal Circuit rule governing subject matter jurisdiction over declaratory judgment actions
  • Warner-Lambert Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., reinstating non-enablement defense rejected on summary judgment
  • Walgreen Co. v. Rullan, invalidating on commerce clause grounds statute requiring licensure for new retail pharmacies
  • Stark v. Advanced Magnetics, Inc., reinstating claim for correction of inventorship on issued patent
  • Volkswagenwerk AG v. Wheeler, restricting use of automobile manufacturer trademarks by independent service companies
  • In litigation on behalf of a major consumer product manufacturer, invalidated on takings clause ground a statute requiring public disclosure of trade secret ingredients

Mr. Dinger has also represented clients as amici curiae before the U.S. Supreme Court and in various federal circuit courts.

Professional Activities

Mr. Dinger is a member of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's Standing Advisory Committee on the Rules of Professional Conduct (past chair), the American Intellectual Property Law Association, the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers and the American, Massachusetts and Boston Bar Associations.

Mr. Dinger has a long-standing interest in education reform. He currently chairs the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education, a business advocacy group that played a central part in drafting and advocating for the landmark Massachusetts Education Reform Act of 1993 - a law that established a national model for standards-based education reform. For many years, Mr. Dinger represented the Boston Public Schools in connection with the system's long desegregation process.

Credentials

Education

JD1978

Harvard Law School

(magna cum laude)

MAMathematics1975

Boston University

BAMathematics1974

Williams College

(summa cum laude)

Admissions

Bars

  • Massachusetts

Courts

  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts

Recognition & Awards

While at Harvard Law School, Mr. Dinger served as Managing Editor of the Harvard Law Review.