Life Sciences is an area ripe for trade secrets misappropriation litigation. In recent news, Merz Pharmaceuticals, LLC filed a lawsuit under the North Carolina Uniform Trade Secrets Act alleging that its former director of federal accounts, Andrew Thomas, stole trade secrets relating to Merz’s flagship botulinum toxin drug Xeomin®. Those secrets purportedly included drug pricing strategies, marketing plans, market share data, and potential customer lists, all of which were intended to grow Xeomin®’s presence in the government market sector — a key therapeutic sector for Merz’s drug, which is primarily known for its aesthetic effects.   

Read the full post on the Proskauer in Life Sciences blog.

Posted in Life Sciences, Litigation
Tags: life sciences, North Carolina Uniform Trade Secrets Act, proskauer in life sciences, therapeutics, trade secret misappropriation, Trade Secrets
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Baldassare Vinti Baldassare Vinti

Baldassare (“Baldo”) Vinti is the head of Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group.

Baldo is a first-chair trial lawyer known for navigating complex, bet-the-company intellectual property disputes across industry verticals and next-generation technologies. With over 25 years of experience, Baldo represents leading global companies…

Baldassare (“Baldo”) Vinti is the head of Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group.

Baldo is a first-chair trial lawyer known for navigating complex, bet-the-company intellectual property disputes across industry verticals and next-generation technologies. With over 25 years of experience, Baldo represents leading global companies and universities in patent, trade secret, false advertising, consumer class actions and technology-related breach of contract litigation in federal and state courts as well as before the International Trade Commission.

Baldo is particularly sought after for his courtroom skill and strategic depth, having led trials, arbitrations and appeals in high-stakes disputes involving technologies ranging from pharmaceuticals and medical devices to encryption, digital media, diagnostics, mobile platforms and software. Baldo has represented global corporations, including Arkema S.A., British Telecommunications PLC, Church & Dwight Co., Inc., Henry Schein, Inc., Maidenform Brands Inc., Mitsubishi Electric Corp., Ossur North America Inc., Panasonic Corp., Sony Corp., Welch Foods, Inc. and Zenith Electronics LLC.

With a background in pharmacy, Baldo brings deep domain expertise to pharmaceutical litigation. He has a proven record of driving successful outcomes in complex pharmaceutical milestone payment, royalty and licensing disputes—often stemming from collaboration agreements, co-development deals, and M&A transactions—where the financial and strategic stakes run high.

In addition to representing corporate clients, Baldo works closely with university innovation and technology transfer offices to maximize the financial return of research investments. He develops tailored IP asset optimization strategies and aggressively enforces intellectual property rights to protect and monetize core innovations—whether through high-value licensing agreements, shaping and advancing spin-out company development, or successful litigation.

Baldo also provides strategic counsel on IP due diligence, complex licensing, IP structuring, patentability and freedom-to-operate analyses, and infringement and validity opinions. He advises boards and executive teams on aligning IP strategy with business objectives, mitigating risk and maximizing the value of innovation assets.

A frequent author and commentator on intellectual property topics, Baldo has been quoted in the National Law Journal, Bloomberg BNA, Law360, Westlaw Journal and Inside Counsel magazine. He is also a regular contributor to articles published in Medical Product Outsourcing magazine that deal with the medical device industry.

Baldo served as a judicial intern for Hon. John E. Sprizzo of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and for Hon. Charles A. LaTorella of the New York Supreme Court.

Read more about Baldassare Vinti
Show more Show less
Photo of Michelle M. Ovanesian Michelle M. Ovanesian

Michelle Ovanesian is an associate in the Litigation Department, and a member of the Intellectual Property and Privacy & Cybersecurity practice groups. Michelle’s practice primarily focuses on helping companies navigate the complex and rapidly evolving laws, regulations, and industry best practices relating to…

Michelle Ovanesian is an associate in the Litigation Department, and a member of the Intellectual Property and Privacy & Cybersecurity practice groups. Michelle’s practice primarily focuses on helping companies navigate the complex and rapidly evolving laws, regulations, and industry best practices relating to cybersecurity and data protection.

Her experience includes counseling clients through the important steps that must occur immediately after incidents, as well as navigating the federal and state government investigations and private litigations that often go hand-in-hand with cybersecurity incidents.

In addition, Michelle’s practice has encompassed a variety of other legal matters, including commercial and bankruptcy litigation, in both federal and state courts.  Most recently, Michelle was part of the successful litigation team that represented the Financial Oversight and Management Board in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico’s bankruptcy proceedings.

Michelle is a registered patent attorney before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office; and an International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) Certified Information Privacy Professional, United States (US CIPP).

She maintains an active pro bono practice with a focus on reproductive rights, immigration law, and veterans.

Read more about Michelle M. Ovanesian
Show more Show less
Related Posts
Troubling Trend of “Self” Revocation In the CRISPR Space Continues in Europe
December 17, 2024
To Be Or Not To Be: Self-Revocation of Seminal European Patents Creates New Uncertainty In CRISPR IP Space
November 11, 2024
The Broad Impact of Edwards v. Meril on the Safe Harbor Provision
August 27, 2024