Follow Us

Copyright 2015 Skiermont Derby LLP All Rights Reserved

Sadaf R. Abdullah

S

adaf R. Abdullah’s practice concentrates on commercial and intellectual property litigation, including patent infringement, trademark, ANDA, employment, and antitrust litigation. She has represented clients in the pharmaceutical, computer, telecommunications, and other consumer technology industries. Her practice has encompassed all facets of litigation, including pre-litigation counseling, briefing, fact and expert discovery, claim construction, settlement, alternative dispute resolution, oral argument, and trials. Sadaf has litigated cases in federal district and state court, before the Patent Trial & Appeals Board, before the International Trade Commission, and on appeal before the Federal Circuit.

Sadaf is also an Adjunct Professor at the UNT Dallas College of Law, where she teaches the Employment Law Practicum course for Fall 2016.

Prior to joining Skiermont Derby LLP, Sadaf was a senior associate at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP in Boston and New York.

While in law school, Sadaf interned in the Major Crimes Unit of the United States Attorney’s Office in Boston, where she performed legal research, drafted pleadings and assisted with trial preparation. As a student advocate with the Hale & Dorr Legal Services Center from 2004 to 2005, Sadaf advised and represented clients in family law and employment discrimination matters. She also held a summer associate position with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law of the Boston Bar Association.


Representative Matters

Coalition for Affordable Drugs (ADROCA) LLC v. Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. (PTAB)

IPR2015-01850, -01853, -01857, -01858

Coalition for Affordable Drugs VI LLC v. Celgene Corp. (PTAB)

IPR2015-01092, -01096, -01102, -01103

Coalition for Affordable Drugs II, LLC v. Cosmo Tech., Ltd. (PTAB)

IPR2015-00988

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Actavis et al. (District of New Jersey)

Represented patent holder against numerous generic companies seeking to market versions of Novartis’s Zometa and Reclast products.

Linksmart v. T-Mobile et al. (Eastern District of Texas, Central District of California)

Defended telecommunications companies Cisco Inc. and T-Mobile in a multi-defendant lawsuit against allegations of patent infringement in relation to their networking products.

App Press LLC v. Apress LLC (Southern District of Indiana)

Represented publishing company Apress LLC in trademark matter asserting infringement of its mark.

Anascape, Ltd. v. Nintendo of America, Inc. (Eastern District of Texas, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit)

Defended videogame manufacturer Nintendo against allegations of patent infringement with respect to its highly successful Wii and GameCube products. Representation continued through trial and appeal.

Enzo Life Sciences v. Roche Molecular Systems and Becton Dickinson & Co. (District of Delaware)

Defended biomedical companies against allegations of patent infringement relating to DNA probe technology.

Somaxon Pharmaceuticals v. Actavis et al. (District of Delaware)

Represented patent holder against numerous generic companies seeking to market versions of Somaxon’s Silenor product.

SiRF Technology Holdings Inc. v. Global Locate Inc. (International Trade Commission)

Represented Global Locate in ITC investigations relating to GPS and navigation technology against its competitor. Representation continued through hearing stage.

Braintree Laboratories v. Schwarz Pharma (District of Delaware)

Represented patent holder defending against antitrust claims asserted by a generic manufacturer seeking to market a generic version of Braintree’s Miralax product. Representation continued through trial and appeal.

Eastman Kodak v. Samsung (International Trade Commission)

Represented digital camera manufacturer Kodak in investigations before the International Trade Commission. Representation continued through hearing stage.

Warner Chilcott v. Teva et al. (District of Delaware)

Represented patent holder against numerous generic companies seeking to market versions of Warner Chilcott’s Actonel Once-A-Month product.

In re Intel Corporation (Federal Trade Commission)

Represented Intel in antitrust investigation relating to Intel’s graphics technology.

Neptune Technologies & Bioressources, et al. v. Aker Biomarine ASA (District of Massachusetts)

Represented owner of patent relating to method of manufacturing krill oil in asserting its patent claims against competitor.

LoggerHead Tools, LLC v. Sears Corp. et al. (Northern District of Illinois)

Represents owner of patents relating to an adjustable gripping tool in asserting its patent rights and claims of trademark infringement and unfair competition against major retailer Sears and tool manufacturer Apex.


Speaking Engagements, Presentations, and Publications

4 Reasons To Use Electronic Deposition Exhibits, Law360, New York (October 21, 2015, 10:13 AM ET).

Patent Pirates: the Aftermath of Halo, Dallas Bar Association (February 2017, Volume 42, Number 2, page 6).

DALLAS
  • 1601 Elm Street, Suite 4400, Dallas, Texas 75201
  • 214.978.6600
LOS ANGELES
  • 800 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1450
    Los Angeles, California 90017
  • 213.788.4500
Follow Us

Copyright 2016 Skiermont Derby LLP All Rights Reserved