The law applies to nearly every business decision, particularly when that decision concerns the protection, monetization, or enforcement of innovation in the form of intellectual property. As a litigator and counselor, Oren Langer helps clients avoid legal minefields, make decisions, and carry out those decisions in furtherance of his clients’ business objectives. He has and continues to represent clients through every stage of litigation, from pre-suit investigations, case-initiation, and discovery--electronic, fact, and expert--to dispositive motion practice, mediation, and trial. Mr. Langer has represented plaintiffs and defendants in complex commercial litigation, and patent and trademark infringement litigations. His intellectual property litigation experience spans various industries including pharmaceuticals (under the Hatch-Waxman regulatory framework), chemicals, telecommunications, video gaming, retail services, and representing clients in Rate Court proceedings. Mr. Langer also advises his clients on transactional matters, including licensing negotiations and campaigns, and monetizing intellectual property in anticipation of prospective mergers or acquisitions.
Prior to his legal career, Mr. Langer earned a Bachelor's degree in Chemistry and interned and worked at Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pharmacopeia as an organic chemist. During law school, Mr. Langer interned at the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey for Judge Alfred J. Lechner, Jr. and Judge Dennis M. Cavanaugh. Mr. Langer has represented clients in a wide range of jurisdictions, including in the district courts of California, Delaware, New York, New Jersey, and Texas, where intellectual property cases are prevalent and for which local patent rules must be adhered to.
Mr. Langer is committed to pro bono representation of clients that need legal help but cannot afford or access it. Recently, after seven years of litigation, Mr. Langer successfully obtained asylum for a woman and her husband from the Kyrgyz Republic on the basis of religious discrimination. Mr. Langer also counsels various artists and takes part in clinics in association with the organization Volunteer Lawyer for the Arts. Mr. Langer co-manages the firm’s Well & Good writing program, which teaches associates to develop sound writing principles while, at the same time, produces written work product for one of the firm’s partnering pro bono agencies.
Mr. Langer is the principal editor and contributor of the firm’s Hatch-Waxman Litigation quarterly newsletter, GENERICally Speaking, which reports on recently filed ANDA lawsuits, ANDA approvals, generic drug launches, relevant settlements, and case blurbs on meaningful court decisions. Finally, Mr. Langer serves as the Hiring Partner for the firm’s New York office.
Trial counsel to Collegium Pharmaceutical in Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, a Hatch-Waxman litigation matter involving 14 Orange Book-listed patents for the oxycodone product Xtampza ER. The case resulted in a settlement in which defendant Teva agreed to a consent judgment confirming that its proposed generic products infringe on Collegium’s asserted patents. Under the settlement, Collegium will grant Teva a license to market its generic version of Xtampza ER in the United States beginning on or after September 2, 2033.
Represented Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning a medication indicated to treat people with a lung disease called idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Genentech, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, 19-0190-RGA (D. Del.).
Represented Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning an anti-diabetic medication indicated in patients with type 2 diabetes and used to control high blood sugar. Shionogi Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, 18-1564-MSG (D. Del.).
Represented Chinese pharmaceutical company Bostal Drug Delivery Co., Ltd. and CEO of NJ-based pharmaceutical company in defense of a shareholder derivative case alleging, among other things, misappropriation of trade secrets. Austar Int’l Ltd. v. AustarPharma LLC, 19-8356-KM-MAH (D.N.J.).
Represented Torrent Pharmaceuticals in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning an anti-convulsant medication indicated for the treatment of partial-onset seizures in patients four years of age and older. Bial - Portela & CA., S.A. et al v. Torrent Pharms. Ltd., 18-0279-VAC-MPT (D. Del.).
Represented Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc. in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning an analgesic medication indicated for the management of severe pain. Collegium Pharm., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., 18-0300-LPS (D. Del.).
Represented device manufacturer Ypsomed AG as a third-party in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning a drug for treating diabetes. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC v. Merck, Sharp & Dohme Corp., 16-0812-RGA (D. Del.).
Represented Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC in multiple Hatch-Waxman patent litigations concerning a drug for treating pain. Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, No. 15-2023 (Fed. Cir.); Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, No. 17-1094 (Fed. Cir.).
Represented Torrent Pharmaceuticals in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning a drug for treating COPD. Takeda GmbH v. Torrent Pharms. Ltd., 3:15-cv-03375-FLW-DEA (consolidated) (D.N.J.).
Represented Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc. in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning a Section 505(b)(2) application for a drug for treating pain. Purdue Pharma, L.P. v. Collegium Pharm., Inc., No. 15-13099-FDS (D. Mass.).
Represented Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning a drug for treating secondary hyperparathyroidism in adult patients with chronic kidney disease on dialysis. Amgen Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, 16-0853-GMS (consolidated) (D. Del.).
Represented Vesture Group, Inc. and its retailer co-defendants, J. C. Penney Corp., Inc., Burlington Stores, Inc., and Sears, Roebuck and Co., in defense of trademark infringement claims concerning the mark “Pinky” used in girls’ clothing. We are currently awaiting resolution of Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Pulse Creations, Inc. v. Vesture Group, Inc., 1:15-cv-02496-KPF (S.D.N.Y.)
Represented Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning a drug for the treatment of ADHD. Alza Corp. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC, 16-0914-RGA (D. Del.).
Represented Novel Laboratories, Inc., in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning a drug for treating middle-of-the-night-insomnia. Purdue Pharma. Products L.P. v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC, 2:12-cv-05311-JLL-JAD (D.N.J.). The Federal Circuit summarily affirmed the district court’s decision.
Represented Novel Laboratories Inc., in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation concerning pre-colonoscopy bowel prep drug. Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Novel Labs., Inc., 749 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Represented Digital River, Inc., an online e-commerce company, against class action complaint alleging a violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and other state law claims. Augustine v. SWReg, Inc., 3:13-cv-2007-PGS-LHG (D.N.J.).
Represented Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. against counterclaims asserting patent infringement concerning technology associated with router redundancy architecture and methods of employing the same. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 6:09-cv-422-LED (E.D. Tex.).
Represented IDT Corp., a global telecommunications company in New York state appeal of contractual dispute concerning transfer of telecommunications capacity in a subsea fiber-optic network. IDT Corp. v. Tyco Group S.A.R.L., Index No. 652097/10 (N.Y. App. Div., First Dep’t).
Represented SPI Pharma, Inc., a food and drug excipient manufacturer, against claims of patent infringement concerning sugar polyol additive. Mr. Langer managed the effort during claim construction, fact and expert discovery, which resulted in a JMOL decision at trial, and ultimately a settlement for the parties. Roquette Freres v. SPI Pharma, Inc., 06-540 GMS (D. Del.). (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)
Represented Daiichi Sankyo, a Japanese pharmaceutical company and its U.S. subsidiary, in Hatch-Waxman patent infringement action against generic company seeking to market generic equivalent of topical antibiotic eardrop medication. Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. v. Apotex Inc., 2:03-cv-00937-WGB-MCA (D.N.J.). (Prior to joining Robins Kaplan LLP)
- "Teva Inks Patent Deal With Collegium Over Painkiller," Law360 (September 30, 2020)
- "Hospira Loses Appeal of Sedative Patent Invalidity Decision," Bloomberg Law (January 9, 2020)
- "Robins Kaplan Trial Win for Amneal Pharmaceuticals Over Generic Sensipar," Legal Reader (September 5, 2018)
- "Amgen Loses Sensipar Generics Infringement Litigation," Intellectual Property Magazine (August 10, 2018)
- “Amneal Secures Non-Infringement Ruling in Sensipar Dispute,” IPPro Patents (July 31, 2018)
- “Purdue’s ‘Duplicative’ Suit Over OxyContin Generic Gets Ax,” Law360 (January 16, 2018)
- “Purdue Loses Bid to Fuse Jumble of OxyContin Patent Suits,” Law360 (December 13, 2017)
- “Teva Told to Pay Glaxo $235.5 Million for Infringing Patent,” Bloomberg BNA (June 21, 2017)
- “Vanda Succeeds in Getting Roxane Labs’ Case Booted,” Bloomberg BNA Pharmaceutical Law & Industry Report (December 28, 2016)
- “Amneal Tells Fed Circ. Endo Played With Numbers In Patent,” Law360 (June 14, 2016)
- “Fed. Circ. Upholds Invalidity of Purdue’s Sleep Aid Patents,” Law360 (January 8, 2016)
- “Purdue Insomnia Patents Wrongly Put To Bed, Fed. Circ. Told,” Law360 (January 4, 2016)
- “Purdue's Sleep Aid Patents Are Obvious, Judge Rules,” Law360 (March 30, 2015)
- “Novel Fights 'Patient' Claim Rehearing In Suprep Suit,” Law360 (July 7, 2014)
- “Fed. Circ. Flips Braintree Win In Generic Suprep Suit,” Law360 (April 22, 2014)
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.