Partner, Patrick Doerr
Mr. Rando has represented clients in matters involving computer hardware and software, silicon chip manufacturing, biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, food additives, alternative energy, AI, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, consumer electronics, communications, internet, and e-commerce. He has appeared in courts across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
As appellate counsel, Mr. Rando has served as counsel of record or co-counsel in more than 30 amicus briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit on issues of patent law, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, and constitutional law. Noteworthy filings include eBay Inc. v. MercExchange (2006), Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (2017), American Axle v. Neapco (2021), Amgen v. Sanofi (2023), and Cellect v. Vidal (2024).
Mr. Rando is a Fellow of the Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, having served by judicial appointment as Special Master in numerous complex patent cases, including multi-day Markman hearings and post-discovery proceedings. He also serves as a court-appointed Mediator and Neutral in both patent and commercial disputes.
He has played an active role in judicial and legislative engagement. Mr. Rando co-developed and conducted lecture series for the SDNY and EDNY Patent Pilot Program Judges and Clerks, covering the America Invents Act and Section 101 eligibility post-Alice and Mayo. He represented both the Federal Bar Association (FBA) and New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) at the Tillis/Coons Section 101 Patent Reform Roundtable, and submitted written testimony to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 2019.
Mr. Rando is a former president of the NYIPLA (2023–2024) and has held nearly every leadership position in the organization. He also served as Chair of the FBA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and was a founding member and president of the FBA’s EDNY Chapter. He is a founding member of the Association of Amicus Counsel, and an active contributor to the Federalist Society IP Practice Group Executive Committee.
He frequently lectures at CLE programs, universities, and legal associations on IP, constitutional law, and appellate advocacy. He has been quoted extensively in publications such as Law360, Bloomberg Law, WIPR, and National Law Journal. His scholarly publications include articles in The Federal Lawyer, Touro Law Review, and IPWatchdog.
Partner, Patrick Doerr
Mr. Rando has represented clients in matters involving computer hardware and software, silicon chip manufacturing, biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, food additives, alternative energy, AI, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, consumer electronics, communications, internet, and e-commerce. He has appeared in courts across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
As appellate counsel, Mr. Rando has served as counsel of record or co-counsel in more than 30 amicus briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit on issues of patent law, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, and constitutional law. Noteworthy filings include eBay Inc. v. MercExchange (2006), Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (2017), American Axle v. Neapco (2021), Amgen v. Sanofi (2023), and Cellect v. Vidal (2024).
Mr. Rando is a Fellow of the Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, having served by judicial appointment as Special Master in numerous complex patent cases, including multi-day Markman hearings and post-discovery proceedings. He also serves as a court-appointed Mediator and Neutral in both patent and commercial disputes.
He has played an active role in judicial and legislative engagement. Mr. Rando co-developed and conducted lecture series for the SDNY and EDNY Patent Pilot Program Judges and Clerks, covering the America Invents Act and Section 101 eligibility post-Alice and Mayo. He represented both the Federal Bar Association (FBA) and New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) at the Tillis/Coons Section 101 Patent Reform Roundtable, and submitted written testimony to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 2019.
Mr. Rando is a former president of the NYIPLA (2023–2024) and has held nearly every leadership position in the organization. He also served as Chair of the FBA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and was a founding member and president of the FBA’s EDNY Chapter. He is a founding member of the Association of Amicus Counsel, and an active contributor to the Federalist Society IP Practice Group Executive Committee.
He frequently lectures at CLE programs, universities, and legal associations on IP, constitutional law, and appellate advocacy. He has been quoted extensively in publications such as Law360, Bloomberg Law, WIPR, and National Law Journal. His scholarly publications include articles in The Federal Lawyer, Touro Law Review, and IPWatchdog.
Partner, Patrick Doerr
Mr. Rando has represented clients in matters involving computer hardware and software, silicon chip manufacturing, biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, food additives, alternative energy, AI, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, consumer electronics, communications, internet, and e-commerce. He has appeared in courts across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
As appellate counsel, Mr. Rando has served as counsel of record or co-counsel in more than 30 amicus briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit on issues of patent law, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, and constitutional law. Noteworthy filings include eBay Inc. v. MercExchange (2006), Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (2017), American Axle v. Neapco (2021), Amgen v. Sanofi (2023), and Cellect v. Vidal (2024).
Mr. Rando is a Fellow of the Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, having served by judicial appointment as Special Master in numerous complex patent cases, including multi-day Markman hearings and post-discovery proceedings. He also serves as a court-appointed Mediator and Neutral in both patent and commercial disputes.
He has played an active role in judicial and legislative engagement. Mr. Rando co-developed and conducted lecture series for the SDNY and EDNY Patent Pilot Program Judges and Clerks, covering the America Invents Act and Section 101 eligibility post-Alice and Mayo. He represented both the Federal Bar Association (FBA) and New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) at the Tillis/Coons Section 101 Patent Reform Roundtable, and submitted written testimony to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 2019.
Mr. Rando is a former president of the NYIPLA (2023–2024) and has held nearly every leadership position in the organization. He also served as Chair of the FBA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and was a founding member and president of the FBA’s EDNY Chapter. He is a founding member of the Association of Amicus Counsel, and an active contributor to the Federalist Society IP Practice Group Executive Committee.
He frequently lectures at CLE programs, universities, and legal associations on IP, constitutional law, and appellate advocacy. He has been quoted extensively in publications such as Law360, Bloomberg Law, WIPR, and National Law Journal. His scholarly publications include articles in The Federal Lawyer, Touro Law Review, and IPWatchdog.
Associate Professor of Law, Center for Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship, University of Missouri School of Law
Professor Lietzan researches, writes, and teaches primarily in the areas of food and drug regulation, intellectual property, and administrative law. Some of her recent scholarship has focused on the nature and purpose of the new drug approval system, federal regulation of fecal microbiota transplantation, federal regulation of products derived from cannabis, the political economy of the Hatch-Waxman (generic drug) statute, and incentives to study already approved drugs for new uses. She is an award-winning teacher, and she has been an elected member of the American Law Institute since 2006.
Professor Lietzan brings to her scholarship and teaching eighteen years of private practice experience, eight of them as a partner in the food and drug group at Covington & Burling in Washington, DC. In practice, she handled a wide range of complex legal problems and broader legislative and regulatory policy questions affecting FDA-regulated companies. This work included lifecycle management and strategy issues, regulatory strategy and advocacy, white collar defense, congressional investigations, briefing in products liability cases, and international regulatory policy work. She was involved in every major amendment to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) between 1997 and 2014 and was deeply immersed for more than a decade in the development of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2010. She has been consistently identified by her peers in private practice as a “Best Lawyer in America” in the categories of FDA law (since 2013) and Biotechnology Law (since 2007).
Professor Lietzan has held one leadership position or another at the Food and Drug Law Institute (FDLI) since 2004, including a stint on its Board of Directors from 2008 to 2012. She also held leadership positions in the American Bar Association’s Section of Science and Technology Law for fourteen years.
Professor Lietzan received a bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina, where she graduated with honors in history. She holds a master’s degree in history from UCLA and a law degree with high honors from Duke Law School.
Andrew A. Hufford is an Intellectual Property attorney with Brinks Gilson & Lione. His practice emphasizes US and global patent prosecution in biopharma, chemistry, and plant genetics. He also has significant experience in patent and trade secret litigation, inter-partes review, and patent due diligence. Mr. Hufford is the Vice Chair of the Utah State Bar Intellectual Property Section; a founding member of the David K. Winder IP Inns of Court; and an active member of the American Bar Association’s IP Law Section.
Mr. Hufford was a Professor of Biology before practicing law. He holds a Bachelor of Science (Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa) and Master of Science in Biochemistry, and spent several years conducting clinical pharmacology research. He earned his J.D. from the University of Houston, where he was an Articles Editor with the Houston Journal of Health Law and Policy and a member of the Moot Court and Mock Trial teams.
Associate Professor of Law, Center for Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship, University of Missouri School of Law
Professor Lietzan researches, writes, and teaches primarily in the areas of food and drug regulation, intellectual property, and administrative law. Some of her recent scholarship has focused on the nature and purpose of the new drug approval system, federal regulation of fecal microbiota transplantation, federal regulation of products derived from cannabis, the political economy of the Hatch-Waxman (generic drug) statute, and incentives to study already approved drugs for new uses. She is an award-winning teacher, and she has been an elected member of the American Law Institute since 2006.
Professor Lietzan brings to her scholarship and teaching eighteen years of private practice experience, eight of them as a partner in the food and drug group at Covington & Burling in Washington, DC. In practice, she handled a wide range of complex legal problems and broader legislative and regulatory policy questions affecting FDA-regulated companies. This work included lifecycle management and strategy issues, regulatory strategy and advocacy, white collar defense, congressional investigations, briefing in products liability cases, and international regulatory policy work. She was involved in every major amendment to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) between 1997 and 2014 and was deeply immersed for more than a decade in the development of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2010. She has been consistently identified by her peers in private practice as a “Best Lawyer in America” in the categories of FDA law (since 2013) and Biotechnology Law (since 2007).
Professor Lietzan has held one leadership position or another at the Food and Drug Law Institute (FDLI) since 2004, including a stint on its Board of Directors from 2008 to 2012. She also held leadership positions in the American Bar Association’s Section of Science and Technology Law for fourteen years.
Professor Lietzan received a bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina, where she graduated with honors in history. She holds a master’s degree in history from UCLA and a law degree with high honors from Duke Law School.
President, Society for the Rule of Law
George T. Conway III has been a partner in the Litigation Department of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz since January 1994. He joined the firm in September 1988. His litigation experience has included a variety of high-profile matters spanning many areas of law in federal and state courts throughout the country. He has extensive experience in securities litigation, mergers and acquisitions litigation, contract litigation, antitrust litigation, and other litigation, both at the trial and appellate levels.
In the area of securities litigation, he recently briefed and argued the case for respondents in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 does not apply extraterritorially to claims of so-called "foreign-cubed" plaintiffs -- foreign investors who purchased securities of foreign issuers on foreign exchanges. He also recently argued and won a precedent-setting motion to dismiss so-called "foreign-squared" claims against European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. brought by American plaintiffs who purchased that foreign company's shares on foreign exchanges.
Mr. Conway also recently argued and won an important appeal under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 on behalf of the Swiss installation artist Christoph Büchel in the artist’s highly publicized dispute with the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art. He also successfully represented the Chief Judge of the State of New York and the New York Unified Court System in historic constitutional litigation over the State of New York’s extended failure to adjust judicial salaries. Mr. Conway also played a substantial role in the successful defense of Kenneth Langone’s Invemed Associates in a disciplinary proceeding before the NASD (now FINRA) that resulted in what the New York Times called a "withering," "high-profile defeat" for the regulators.
Mr. Conway’s work in mergers and acquisitions litigation includes the representation of Rohm and Haas Co. and ADVO, Inc., in, respectively, Rohm and Haas v. Dow Chemical Co., and Valassis Communications v. ADVO, two Delaware Chancery Court cases involving claims to enforce merger agreements, as well as two historic cases in the development of Delaware corporate law governing mergers and acquisitions, QVC v. Paramount Communications and Paramount Communications v. Time Inc. and Warner Communications, in addition to many other cases involving contests for corporate control in the Delaware courts and elsewhere over the past two decades.
In addition, Mr. Conway played a substantial role in prosecuting one of the most prominent defamation cases in recent memory (Philip Morris v. American Broadcasting Cos.). He has extensive experience in merger-related private antitrust litigation and government antitrust investigations, including the defense of Cardinal Health in the preliminary injunction proceedings before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in FTC v. Cardinal Health. He also represented the National Football League in trademark and antitrust litigation against the Dallas Cowboys in NFL Properties v. Dallas Cowboys Football Club. His pro bono work includes his successful representation in the Second Circuit of crime victims and public-interest groups as amici curiae in opposing claims that federal law requires the State of New York to allow felons to vote while still incarcerated.
Mr. Conway is a graduate of Harvard College, where in 1984 he received an A.B. magna cum laude in biochemical sciences. He received his J.D. in 1987 from Yale Law School, where he was an editor of the Yale Law Journal. In 1987 and 1988, he served as a law clerk to Circuit Judge Ralph K. Winter, Jr. of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Judge Readler earned his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Michigan. After graduating, he served as a law clerk to Judge Alan Norris of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Judge Readler then began practicing law in the Columbus office of the international law firm Jones Day, eventually spending ten years as a partner in the firm’s Issues and Appeals Practice Group. While at Jones Day, Judge Readler appeared in state and federal trial and appellate courts around the country, most frequently the Supreme Court of Ohio and the Sixth Circuit. Judge Readler also successfully argued before the United States Supreme Court in McQuiggin v. Perkins on behalf of an inmate claiming actual innocence. His other pro bono representations include representing capital defendants before the Tenth Circuit and the Supreme Court of Ohio, as well as representing defendants sentenced to life in prison before the Sixth Circuit. While at Jones Day, Judge Readler traveled to Nairobi with Lawyers Without Borders to train Kenyan lawyers in prosecuting domestic violence cases, and he was also a recipient of the American Marshall Memorial Fellowship awarded by the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Following his career in private practice, Judge Readler served as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the United States Department of Justice from 2017 to 2019. In that role, Judge Readler led and supervised over 1,000 lawyers in the Department’s largest litigating division, briefing and arguing several cases on behalf of the United States in federal courts across the country, including high-profile cases significant to the Administration and the Department. In March 2019, Judge Readler was confirmed to serve as a Circuit Judge on the Sixth Circuit. He resides in Columbus.
Partner, Ashbrook Byrne Kresge Flowers LLC
Ben Flowers, a partner at Ashbrook Byrne Kresge Flowers LLC, is an accomplished litigator with experience briefing, arguing, and winning high-stakes cases in courts throughout the country.
Before joining the law firm, Ben served as Ohio's 10th Solicitor General. In that role he regularly represented the State of Ohio before the Supreme Court of the United States, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and the Supreme Court of Ohio. Most prominently, in National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Ben led a multi-state challenge to OSHA's vaccine mandate, ultimately prevailing before the Supreme Court.
Ben is a graduate of The Ohio State University and the University of Chicago Law School. Following law school, Ben clerked for Judge Sandra Ikuta of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and for Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of this United States. Ben lives in Upper Arlington, Ohio with his wife Denise and their three very active children.
Partner, Patrick Doerr
Mr. Rando has represented clients in matters involving computer hardware and software, silicon chip manufacturing, biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, food additives, alternative energy, AI, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, consumer electronics, communications, internet, and e-commerce. He has appeared in courts across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
As appellate counsel, Mr. Rando has served as counsel of record or co-counsel in more than 30 amicus briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit on issues of patent law, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, and constitutional law. Noteworthy filings include eBay Inc. v. MercExchange (2006), Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (2017), American Axle v. Neapco (2021), Amgen v. Sanofi (2023), and Cellect v. Vidal (2024).
Mr. Rando is a Fellow of the Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, having served by judicial appointment as Special Master in numerous complex patent cases, including multi-day Markman hearings and post-discovery proceedings. He also serves as a court-appointed Mediator and Neutral in both patent and commercial disputes.
He has played an active role in judicial and legislative engagement. Mr. Rando co-developed and conducted lecture series for the SDNY and EDNY Patent Pilot Program Judges and Clerks, covering the America Invents Act and Section 101 eligibility post-Alice and Mayo. He represented both the Federal Bar Association (FBA) and New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) at the Tillis/Coons Section 101 Patent Reform Roundtable, and submitted written testimony to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 2019.
Mr. Rando is a former president of the NYIPLA (2023–2024) and has held nearly every leadership position in the organization. He also served as Chair of the FBA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and was a founding member and president of the FBA’s EDNY Chapter. He is a founding member of the Association of Amicus Counsel, and an active contributor to the Federalist Society IP Practice Group Executive Committee.
He frequently lectures at CLE programs, universities, and legal associations on IP, constitutional law, and appellate advocacy. He has been quoted extensively in publications such as Law360, Bloomberg Law, WIPR, and National Law Journal. His scholarly publications include articles in The Federal Lawyer, Touro Law Review, and IPWatchdog.
Andrew A. Hufford is an Intellectual Property attorney with Brinks Gilson & Lione. His practice emphasizes US and global patent prosecution in biopharma, chemistry, and plant genetics. He also has significant experience in patent and trade secret litigation, inter-partes review, and patent due diligence. Mr. Hufford is the Vice Chair of the Utah State Bar Intellectual Property Section; a founding member of the David K. Winder IP Inns of Court; and an active member of the American Bar Association’s IP Law Section.
Mr. Hufford was a Professor of Biology before practicing law. He holds a Bachelor of Science (Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa) and Master of Science in Biochemistry, and spent several years conducting clinical pharmacology research. He earned his J.D. from the University of Houston, where he was an Articles Editor with the Houston Journal of Health Law and Policy and a member of the Moot Court and Mock Trial teams.
Courthouse Steps Decision: Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi
Robert J. Rando
On May 18, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Sanofi in its dispute with...
Courthouse Steps Decision: Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi
Robert J. Rando
On May 18, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Sanofi in its dispute with...
Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi - Post-Argument SCOTUScast
Robert J. Rando
On November 4, 2022, the Supreme Court granted cert in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, a...
Courthouse Steps Decision: Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi
TeleforumSandoz, Inc. v. Amgen, Inc. Post-Decision SCOTUScast
Erika Lietzan
On June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court decided Sandoz, Inc. v. Amgen, Inc. consolidated with...
Courthouse Steps: Amgen, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. - Podcast
Andrew A. Hufford
The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. § 262) created an...
Courthouse Steps: Amgen, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.
TeleforumA Second Look at the CREATES Act: What’s Not Being Said
Erika Lietzan
Note from the Editor: This article critically discusses the CREATES Act, which is currently pending...
Amgen Inc. v. Harris - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
George T. Conway, George ConwayI
On January 25, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Amgen Inc v. Harris without oral argument....
Felix v. Ganley Chevrolet, Inc.
Chad A. Readler, Benjamin M. Flowers
When the Ohio Supreme Court interprets state class-action law, it often relies on decisions from...