The FirmAttorneysPracticesRecruiting
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New YorkWashingtonParisLondonMilanRomeFrankfurtBrussels
alliance Dickson Minto W.S.

Print PageEmail Page
Thomas J. Meloro
Partner


MAIN OFFICE:
New York
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
787 Seventh Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10019-6099, U.S.A.
T 212-728-8248
F 212-728-9248
 
Download V-Card

Thomas J. Meloro is a partner in the Intellectual Property and Litigation Departments of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP in New York. Mr. Meloro focuses on litigation and adversarial matters concerning patents, trademarks, and trade secrets. His litigation experience has spanned across technologies and industries ranging from pharmaceuticals to telecommunications, with particular emphasis on pharmaceutical and biologic products, medical products, and consumer products.

In his practice at Willkie and previously, Mr. Meloro has represented a variety of major life sciences and technology companies in litigation matters. In the pharmaceutical field, Mr. Meloro has been lead counsel in litigations involving drug products including: Dexmedetomidine (Precedex), Diclofenac (Cambia), lansoprazole (Prevacid Solutabs), cefdinir (Omnicef), minocycline (Solodyn), mixed amphetamines (Adderall XR), amlodipine besylate (Norvasc), and amoxiclav (Augmentin). He recently successfully represented Hospira Inc. and Orion Corp. in protecting the validity and enforceability of the patent for the active ingredient in the sedative Precedex.

Mr. Meloro was lead trial counsel in litigation in which his client challenged seven patents concerning the antibiotic product Augmentin. The district court held all seven patents invalid, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment in its entirety in a frequently-cited decision.

Mr. Meloro also has significant experience with biologic products, including several trials concerning patents related to recombinant human growth hormone. His clients prevailed after trial and were awarded a judgment that the patent on biosynthetic ripe human growth hormone was invalid and unenforceable for inequitable conduct. Mr. Meloro also has been involved in matters concerning protein chemistry, immunoassays, and gene expression analyses.

In addition to his trial and other district court experience, Mr. Meloro has prevailed in appeals he argued following trials, summary judgments and preliminary injunction decisions. In one case argued by Mr. Meloro, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a landmark en banc decision in favor of Willkie’s client which settled a longstanding split in authority concerning product-by-process patent claims.

Mr. Meloro’s practice includes counseling on patent validity, enforceability and infringement, as well as intellectual property issues associated with licensing, mergers and other transactions. Additionally, Mr. Meloro represents early-stage companies and private equity investors, among others, in such matters.

Selected Professional and Business Activities

Mr. Meloro is President and member of the Board of Directors of the New York Intellectual Property Law Association, and a founding Executive Committee member of the Hon. William C. Conner Inn of Court. He also is a member of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and the American Bar Association.

A frequent speaker, Mr. Meloro has lectured on antitrust law for Franklin Pierce Law Center’s Advanced Licensing Institute and contributed a chapter on antitrust issues for Aspen Publishing’s Licensing Update.

Education
1989, Georgetown University Law Center, J.D.
1986, Manhattan College, B.Ch.E

Bar Admissions
New York, 1990
New Jersey

Courts
  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit


Practice Focus
Intellectual Property

Litigation

Education
  • 1989, Georgetown University Law Center, J.D.
  • 1986, Manhattan College, B.Ch.E

Bar Admissions
New York, 1990
New Jersey

Courts
  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit




Under the rules of certain jurisdictions, this material may constitute attorney advertising.  Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.