Dominick A. Conde

Dominick A. Conde

Partner, New York

The competitive spirit that Dom Conde brings to every one of his engagements has made him one of the nation’s preeminent patent litigators. For more than 25 years, it has fueled his work on large-scale patent litigation, in which he often represents pharmaceutical clients in high-value ANDA matters. Those familiar with his work call him a “top pharma lawyer” and say that he “completely stands out in terms of raw intelligence, lawyering skills and putting together the perfect case.” – Chambers USA

In addition to serving as lead counsel in Hatch-Waxman litigation, Dom regularly represents clients in contested proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He also frequently represents clients outside the pharmaceutical industry.

The consistent thread in all of Dom’s work – and the reason he is regularly recognized as one of the top IP litigators in the country – is his indefatigable will to reach a favorable result for his client. It’s why he is known not only as an “intellectual giant” – Best Lawyers, but as a “mature, pragmatic lawyer with great judgment.” – IAM 250

Dom has spent his entire career in private practice at Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto. He previously served as the firm’s Managing Partner and currently sits on the firm’s Management Committee.

Case Highlight
Dom secured a complete victory in Hatch-Waxman litigation for Pfizer Inc. and two other clients against generic eye drops infringed patents held by his clients, and that those patents were not invalid for obviousness. He cemented the result with a unanimous decision in his clients’ favor at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
What Others Say
  • “able to digest a vast amount of technical information very quickly, and wade through to identify the fundamental strengths and weaknesses of a case.” (IAM Patent 1000 The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners, 2018)
  • “very responsive, very thorough and very strategic” (Chambers USA 2018)
  • “I have confidence that the matters we have are being handled very well” (Chambers USA 2018)
  • “He is very strategic, too, and has an ability to simplify complex information, including with regard to potential risks and rewards, for those without an IP background – in that way, he helps clients participate in the decision-making process.” (IAM Patent 1000 The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners, 2018)
  • "A super-tough advocate.”
    (IAM Patent 1000 The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners, 2017)
  • "He sees the forest through the trees and never gets tunnel vision. He also understands the need to find business solutions to legal problems and is very pragmatic.”
    (IAM Patent 1000 The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners, 2015)
  • “an intellectual giant, but one who can distill complex patent issues into clear, concise and cogent language that anyone can understand. Business leaders like him because of his clarity. Attorneys like him because they know his direct advice is grounded in thorough legal analysis and experience”
    (Best Lawyers, 2014)
  • “outstanding for his remarkable ability to provide practical solutions for navigating the often complex area of patent litigation”
    (Best Lawyers, 2014)
  • “superb litigator” [that is] “taking up the mantle of lead trial lawyer in sprawling litigation surrounding pharmaceuticals, medical devices and diagnostics”
    (IAM 1000 The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners, 2013)
Representative Matters
  • Astellas, Pfizer, and U. of California against Actavis, Zydus, Roxane and Apotex on patents covering Xtandi® used for the treatment of prostate cancer.
  • Aralez Pharmaceuticals against Actavis on patents covering Yosprala® used for the prevention of cardiovascular events for patients that are at risk of developing gastric ulcers.
  • Pernix Therapeutics against Alvogen and Actavis on patents covering Zohydro® used to relief severe pain.
  • Sanofi-Aventis against Fresenius, Accord Healthcare, Mylan and Actavis on patents covering Jevtana® used to treat metastatic prostate cancer.  
  • Pozen Inc. against Actavis, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Mylan and Lupin on patents covering Vimovo® used by patients that have arthritis pain and risk of NSAID induced stomach ulcers.
  • Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. against Noven Pharmaceuticals on patents covering Exelon® Patch (rivastigmine) used to treat Alzheimer’s disease.
  • Warner Chilcott against Teva Pharmaceuticals and Watson Laboratories on patents covering Atelvia® used for the treatment of osteoporosis.
  • Warner Chilcott against Mylan Pharamceuticals and Lupin on a patent covering Generess® for oral contraception.
  • Merck against Sandoz on patents covering AzaSite® used to treat eye infections.
  • Warner Chilcott against Lupin and Watson Laboratories on patents covering Lo Loestrin 24®, a low dose oral contraceptive.
  • Warner Chilcott against Watson Laboratories on a patent covering Loestrin 24®, an oral contraceptive. Reliable Sprinkler Co. against a complaint filed by Tyco Fire Products on multiple patents relating to fire protection sprinklers.
  • Merck against Teva Pharmaceuticals and Sandoz Inc. on patents covering Cancidas® used to treat fungal infections.
  • Sanofi-Aventis against Sandoz Inc., et al. on a patent relating to Eloxatin® a treatment option for stage III colon cancer and advanced colorectal cancer.
  • Daiichi Sankyo against generic drug maker Mylan Pharmaceuticals in a Hatch-Waxman lawsuit concerning Daiichi Sankyo’s Benicar® family of high blood pressure medicines.
  • Warner Chilcott against multiple defendants on a patent relating to Doryx®, a broad-spectrum tetracycline antibiotic.
  • Warner Chilcott against Barr Laboratories and Watson Pharmaceuticals on patents relating to Warner Chilcott's Femcon Fe® chewable oral contraceptive.
  • Entegris against infringement allegations relating to filtration technology.
  • Reckitt Benckiser against Tris Pharmaceuticals and Amneal Pharmaceuticals concerning patents relating to Delsum®, a 12-hour cough suppressant.
  • Sepracor Pharmaceuticals against Sandoz Inc., et al. on patents relating to Clarinex®, an allergy medication.
  • Adams Respiratory against multiple defendants on patents relating to Adams' highly successful Mucinex® product.
  • KOS Pharmaceuticals against Barr Laboratories on patents covering KOS’ niaspan anti-cholesterol drugs.
  • Bristol Myers against Teva Pharmaceuticals regarding patents covering Bristol’s anti-bacterial agent gatifloxacin.
  • Eli Lilly against Teva Pharmaceuticals on patents involving Lilly's highly successful product Sarafem®, which is used to treat Prementrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD), a severe form of PMS.
  • Warner Chilcott against KV Pharmaceuticals on a patent covering pregnancy vitamins.
  • Bristol-Myers against Rhone-Poulenc Rorer on patents relating to semi-synthetic process technology for making Taxol.
  • Dixon Ticonderoga against Dri Mark Products in patents involving metallic inks used in writing instruments.
  • American Maize Products against Grain Processing Corp. on patents relating to maltodextrin food additives.
  • Bausch & Lomb against Alcon Laboratories on technology regarding contact lens disinfectants.
  • Exxon against Lubrizol regarding motor oil additives.
Events / Publications
News & Press