Skip to Main Content

Meet Our Professionals

Robert L. Florence

Partner
Atlanta | 678.690.5701
Fax | 404.869.6972

Robert Florence is a registered patent attorney who focuses his practice on patents and trademarks, as well as related business litigation with specific emphasis on complex pharmaceutical patent litigation brought under the Hatch-Waxman Act. He is known nationally for his Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) work and has extensive experience counseling generic pharmaceutical companies regarding pre-litigation strategies and defending such companies in patent litigation. 

Robert handles litigation from inception through trial and has litigated cases before both state and federal courts and the American Arbitration Association. He has negotiated and prepared commercial agreements that include licensing, assignment of rights, development, indemnification, nondisclosure, noncompete, employment and settlement agreements.

He has prosecuted domestic and international patent applications in a variety of arts, including mechanical, chemical, biotechnology, and medical devices. Robert has:

  • Conducted intellectual property searches.
  • Prepared patent and trademark applications.
  • Managed intellectual property portfolios that include the payment of maintenance, renewal, and annuity fees for domestic and international cases.
  • Drafted patentability, product clearance, non-infringement, invalidity, and trademark availability opinions.
  • Prepared responses to patent and trademark office actions.
  • Performed intellectual property audits.

Before practicing law, Robert taught science as a secondary school teacher and held teaching certifications in biology, chemistry, and physical science. While earning his law degree from the University of New Hampshire School of Law he was honored with a merit scholarship and served as an articles editor and then as a senior editor for IDEA: The Journal of Law and Technology.

Representative Experience

  • Represented defendants in numerous cases involving Paragraph IV Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) patent litigation, including:
    • Pfizer et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. (U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware).
    • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Matrix Laboratories Ltd. (U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware).
    • Teva Women’s Health, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Famy Care Ltd. (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey).
    • Shionogi Pharma, Inc. et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware).
    • Abbott Laboratories v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey).
    • Abbott Laboratories v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois).
    • Wyeth v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia).
  • Represented counterclaimant patent owner in patent infringement action. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Alpharma Inc. v. Purdue Pharma L.P. (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia).
  • Represented defendant in patent infringement action). Thomas v. Alltel Communications, Inc., et al. (U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina).
  • Represented claimant in breach of contract and trademark infringement action). Mandarin Holdings, L.P. v. Kaolin, Inc. et al. (American Arbitration Association).
  • Represented plaintiff in fraud, breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets action. Consolidated Engineering Co. v. Alotech, Ltd., LLC (Cobb County Superior Court of Georgia).
  • Represented respondent in breach of software implementation Agreement Action. Crestone International Inc. v. Ajilon Professional Staffing LLC (American Arbitration Association).
  • Argued successfully for the invalidation of four patents related to drugs for a neurological disease. Acorda Therapeutics, Inc., et al. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc., et al. (U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware).
  • Represented defendants in an action for patent infringement, where the court found that our client did not infringe the asserted claims of the patent-in-suit and, as part of a two-part strategy, obtained a ruling before the PTAB that the claims of the patent-in-suit were unpatentable. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s finding of unpatentability. Salix Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. (Fed. Cir.); GeneriCo, LLC et al. v. Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH (IPR).

Loading content

Loading content