Brian Pandya is Partner at Duane Morris LLP and former DOJ official who represents technology, life sciences, and manufacturing companies facing high-stakes litigations and government investigations. As a member of the firm’s Trial Practice Group, Brian’s practice focuses on patent, antitrust, licensing, trade secret, white-collar and complex commercial disputes. His combination of government and private practice experience uniquely positions him to address issues at the intersections of antitrust, data privacy and intellectual property laws.
Before joining the firm, Brian served at the United States Department of Justice as Deputy Associate Attorney General, where he oversaw the Antitrust Division and Civil Division and led initiatives related to privacy/cybersecurity, emerging technologies, digital trade, corporate compliance, and national security. He oversaw and managed major litigations, civil and criminal investigations and settlements collectively worth billions of dollars. Many matters involved coordination with multiple DOJ components, U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and other federal agencies. He also led DOJ engagement with state Attorneys General on various issues.
Before his DOJ appointment, Brian was a partner at a prominent Washington, D.C. law firm. Notable cases as lead counsel included representing Ireland’s largest software company in a bet-the-company lawsuit filed by its largest competitor, defending a well-known Dutch GPS company’s crown jewel mapping and routing products against a $60 million willful infringement claim, and representing a leading pharmaceutical company in an eight-patent dispute related to the synthesis of anti-retroviral drugs. Brian also served for nearly five years as outside IP counsel to a major manufacturing trade association.
Brian began his legal career clerking for Judge Leonard Davis on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. He is a Fellow of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) and a two-time recipient of the Federal Circuit Bar Association’s Pro Bono Advocacy Award, and served as volunteer federal public defender in the Eastern District of Virginia.
You've Got a FRAND in Me: FTC v. Qualcomm's Implications for IP Law and the Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory Standard
Michigan Student Chapter
Zoom Webinar -- University of MichiganVirtual
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Courthouse Steps: SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu Decided
Intellectual Property Practice Group and Regulatory Transparency Project Teleforum
Teleforum
Courthouse Steps: Oil States Energy Services v. Greene's Energy Group Decided
Intellectual Property Practice Group and Regulatory Transparency Project Teleforum
Teleforum
Courthouse Steps: Oil States and SAS Institute Inc. v. Matal
Intellectual Property Practice Group and Regulatory Transparency Project Teleforum
Teleforum
Can Tribal Immunity Shield Blockbuster Drugs from PTAB Scrutiny?
The Patent Trial & Appeal Board, an administrative panel created as part of the America...
Courthouse Steps: SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu Decided
Intellectual Property Practice Group and Regulatory Transparency Project Teleforum
When Congress directs the Patent Office to resolve “any” patent claims a petitioner challenges, must...
Courthouse Steps: Oil States Energy Services v. Greene's Energy Group Decided
Intellectual Property Practice Group and Regulatory Transparency Project Teleforum
Under what circumstances may patents be revoked or modified? What process is due? The questions...
New Frontiers for Tribal Immunity: Patents, Pharmaceuticals, and the PTAB
The courts and Congress have long acknowledged the sovereign status of Native American tribes. Tribes,...
Courthouse Steps: Oil States and SAS Institute Inc. v. Matal
Intellectual Property Practice Group and Regulatory Transparency Project Teleforum
Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group Has the administrative state gone too far into...