Gregory A.Castanias (Greg)

Partner

Washington + 1.202.879.3639

Contact

Partager

Greg Castanias, head of Jones Day's Federal Circuit team, has over 30 years of experience as a leading appellate and intellectual property litigator. His experience includes five Supreme Court arguments, over 100 Federal Circuit arguments, and countless others in federal and state courts from Alaska to Connecticut. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers and a member of the American Law Institute.

Greg is "a top-tier appellate advocate" who is "fabulous at incorporating and mediating among divergent insights" and "a great team player" (Chambers). "Revered as one of the country's top appellate practitioners for his experience handling matters at the Federal Circuit" (LMG Life Sciences), his experience includes technologies ranging from pharmaceuticals, genetics, and diagnostics to chemistry and electronics, as well as design patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret disputes.

Twice named a "Trailblazer and Pioneer" in intellectual property law (The National Law Journal), and constantly recognized as an IP and Life Sciences "Star," Greg has been "instrumental in driving the firm's standout appellate practice" (IAM Patent 1000). "A sharp and effective advocate who picks up the details of the matter quickly" and "a great issue-spotter and skilled advocate" (Legal 500), he has "an instinctual feel for the art of persuasion before the Federal Circuit, where he is highly respected" (IAM Patent 1000).

Greg is the lead author of Federal Appellate Practice and Procedure (West Publishing; 3d edition 2023) and is an adjunct professor of law at Indiana University's Maurer School of Law, where he teaches Appellate Practice and Procedure and Federal Circuit Advocacy.

Expérience

  • R.J. Reynolds successfully enforces patents in ITC trial against Philip Morris in dispute over cigarette alternativeJones Day's client Reynolds achieved a precedent-setting victory before the International Trade Commission (ITC) against its main competitors Philip Morris Products S.A. ("Philip Morris") and Altria Client Services LLC ("Altria") in a patent infringement dispute involving tobacco heating and vaping products.
  • DePuy Synthes wins JMOL in patent litigation involving spinal surgery medical devicesFollowing a two-week trial, Jones Day obtained a complete victory for Johnson & Johnson subsidiaries DePuy Synthes Products, Inc.; DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc.; and Medical Device Business Services, Inc. against patent infringement claims brought by Dr. Mark Barry relating to the use of certain methods and medical instruments for spinal surgery involving DePuy's Expedium® and Viper® systems.
  • Purdue Pharma asserts patent infringement claims under Hatch-Waxman Act related to OxyContin® against Accord HealthcareJones Day represents Purdue Pharma L.P. in asserting patent infringement claims under the Hatch-Waxman Act against generic-drug company Accord Healthcare, Inc. involving several patents directed to OxyContin®.
  • Goodyear defeats trade secrets case involving self-inflating tire technologyJones Day successfully represented Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company ("Goodyear") and its employees accused by a Czech Republic citizen and his companies of misappropriating trade secrets relating to self-inflating tire technology and incorporating the technology into several U.S. patents.
  • Ocular secures win at the Federal Circuit on its IPR challengeJones Day successfully represented Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company that develops treatments for the eye, in upholding its inter partes review win against a patent of competitor Mati Therapeutics, Inc.
  • Takeda trial win in Hatch-Waxman case involving diabetes products upheld by Federal CircuitJones Day successfully represented Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd. in a Hatch-Waxman Act dispute against companies seeking to market generic versions of three diabetes products prior to the expiration of Takeda's patents.
  • DePuy Orthopaedics obtains Federal Circuit affirmance of patent infringement victory involving its flagship knee replacement productJones Day successfully represented Johnson & Johnson subsidiaries DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc.; DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc.; and DePuy Synthes Products, Inc. in their defense against claims of patent infringement brought by MedIdea, L.L.C. relating to the sale of their flagship posterior stabilized knee replacement product, Attune®.
  • Wonderland Nurserygoods secures Federal Circuit affirmance on crib patents without oral argumentJones Day secured a second Federal Circuit win for Wonderland Nurserygoods Co. Ltd in a long-running dispute involving a baby crib patent that underwent multiple rounds of IPRs.
  • Sloan Kettering and Juno Therapeutics win over $1.1 billion after jury verdict and post-trial motions in patent dispute with Kite Pharma/Gilead involving CAR-T therapyOn behalf of patentee Sloan Kettering Institute and exclusive licensee Juno Therapeutics (a subsidiary of Celgene Corporation, a Bristol Myers Squibb company), Jones Day and co-counsel prevailed in a jury trial that spanned eight days and involved 22 witnesses, wherein the jury awarded our clients $752 million in compensation for the infringement of their patents by Kite Pharma, Inc. (a Gilead Sciences, Inc. company) through the making and selling of its infringing CAR-T therapy, YESCARTA®.
  • Google wins Federal Circuit affirmance of successful IPR challenge against navigation systems patentsJones Day successfully represented Google LLC on appeal from an inter partes review ("IPR") proceeding whereby client received a determination that patents relating to navigation systems owned by Makor Issues & Rights Ltd. are unpatentable.
  • U.S. Bank wins appeal, invalidates patent relating to check processing methodsJones Day successfully represented U.S. Bancorp and Elavon, Inc. on an appeal from a judgment that they had infringed Solutran, Inc.'s patent relating to check processing methods.
  • Google obtains victory at Federal Circuit by invalidating all asserted claims from traffic map patentJones Day obtained a victory for Google LLC at the Federal Circuit in an appeal from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB") concerning patent claims directed to processing geographical information relating to traffic.
  • Google secures remand from Federal Circuit directing PTAB to consider whether claims related to online traffic maps are unpatentableJones Day successfully represented Google LLC at the Federal Circuit in an appeal from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB") concerning patent claims directed to on-line traffic maps.
  • Canon and Nikon win eight IPRs against two Papst patentsJones Day successfully represented both Canon and Nikon in eight inter partes reviews relating to two patents owned by Papst Licensing (U.S. Patent Nos. 8,504,746 and 8,966,144).
  • Google prevails at Federal Circuit against patent claims directed to data compressionJones Day successfully represented Google LLC at the Federal Circuit, obtaining an affirmance of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's determination that patent claims directed to data compression and transmission were unpatentable as obvious.
  • Google secures award of attorneys' fees at the Federal CircuitJones Day successfully represented Google LLC at the Federal Circuit, obtaining an affirmance of an attorneys' fees award of $820,000 after plaintiff, Max Sound Corporation's, case was dismissed for lack of standing.
  • The Cato Institute and Professor Gregory Dolin submit brief supporting patentees in interpretation of America Invents ActOn behalf of the Cato Institute and Professor Gregory Dolin, Jones Day submitted an amici curiae brief arguing that executive agencies may not initiate post-grant, inter partes, and covered-business-method review proceedings before the Patent and Trademark Office.
  • Idenix wins $2.54 billion jury verdict in Gilead patent dispute involving hepatitis C drugsAfter a nine day trial and less than two hours of jury deliberation, Jones Day, on behalf of Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC (a subsidiary of Merck & Co.), won the largest patent infringement verdict in U.S. history to date, involving a multi-billion dollar patent dispute with Gilead Sciences Inc. over sofosbuvir, the active ingredient in Gilead’s hepatitis C drugs Sovaldi® and Harvoni®.
  • Purdue Pharma successfully resolves Hatch-Waxman patent infringement claims against Amneal and Kashiv related to OxyContin®Jones Day successfully represented Purdue Pharma L.P. in related Hatch-Waxman patent infringement actions against defendants Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Kashiv Pharma, LLC, pertaining to the submission of an Abbreviated New Drug Application to the FDA seeking approval of generic versions of OxyContin®, a widely prescribed treatment for pain relief.
  • Huawei wins patent appeal and receives its attorneys' fees and experts' costsA cross-practice team from Jones Day successfully represented Huawei Technology Co., Ltd. before the Federal Circuit and obtained a complete affirmance of the district court's grant of summary judgment of noninfringement, and the district court's award of attorneys' fees and expert-witness costs.
    •

    September 2023 Reprint

    Trade Secret Implications of an Employee Defection (Daily Journal)

    August 2021 Alert

    When Trademarks and Design Patents Intersect: Making Waves in Columbia v. Seirus

    June 2021 Blog

    Arthrex: Unreviewable APJ Authority Incompatible with Appointments Clause, PTAB Litigation Blog

    April 2021 Alert

    Supreme Court Excuses Administrative Exhaustion for Some Structural Constitutional Claims

    March 2021 Blog

    Arthrex: Supreme Court Asks "Who’s The Boss?", PTAB Litigation Blog

    May 2020 Alert

    Cutting Through the Redline: What Companies Need to Know About Proposed Amendments for Federal Circuit Arguments

    June 2019 Blog

    Supreme Court To Decide Appealability of PTAB’s Time-Bar Determinations, PTAB Litigation Blog

    June 2019 Blog

    Federal Agencies Not Eligible To Challenge Patents In PTAB Trials, PTAB Litigation Blog

    June 2019 Alert

    Federal Agencies May Not Challenge Patents in AIA Post-Issuance Proceedings

    May 2019 Blog

    Supreme Court Denies Cert On Tribal Sovereign Immunity Question, PTAB Litigation Blog
    Voir toutes les publications

    • December 9, 2019
      IPO Chat Channel, Patent Case Law Year in Review
    • November 16, 2019
      Appellate Judges Education Institute, When the Heat is on: Handling Bonds, Stays and other Appellate Emergencies, panel moderator
    • November 7, 2019
      Indiana Legislative Services Agency, Supreme Court and the Constitution Review
    • October 7, 2019
      American University Washington College of Law Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property, Supreme Court IP Series: Peter v. Nantkwest
    • September 26, 2019
      Intellectual Property Owners Association Annual Meeting, Recent Case Law Update
    • September 19, 2019
      IPO Chat Channel, Federal Circuit v. USPTO: Chevron Deference?
    • July 24, 2019
      Association of Corporate Counsel, Financial Services Network, Supreme Court Term in Review for Business
    • July 19, 2019
      DRI Appellate Advocacy Conference
    • June 14, 2019
      Federal Circuit Bar Association® Bench & Bar® Conference, The Client Perspective: Enterprise and Legal Challenges, panel moderator
    • September 27-28, 2018
      Minnesota CLE’s Midwest Intellectual Property Institute
    • September 20-21, 2018
      9th Annual Supreme Court IP Review at Chicago-Kent
    • June 21, 2018
      Federal Circuit Bar Association's Bench & Bar® Conference: Panel on Excellence in Appellate Practice
    • May 31, 2018
      A New PTAB Landscape: The Impact of SAS, Recent Federal Circuit Decisions, and the Proposed Change to the BRI Standard
    • May 2, 2018
      The Supreme Court Decided Oil States & SAS Institute: Now What?
    • September 18-20, 2017
      Appellate Briefwriting in the Digital Age, Fifth Annual Joint Appellate Advocacy Training
    • March 17, 2017
      Intellectual Property in a Globalized World, American Intellectual Property Association Quarterly Journal's 2d Annual Symposium
    • November 3, 2016
      The U.S. Supreme Court in Transition: A Review and Preview of The Court's Constitutional Decisions from a Post-Scalia Perspective
    • June 13, 2016
      Patents In The Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court: A Look At How The Two National Appellate Courts Have Treated Patents Since The Federal Circuit’s Creation In 1982
    • June 13, 2016
      The Ethics Of Appellate Practice: How The Rules and Standards Of Professional Responsibility Apply In The Appellate Courts
    • January 27, 2016
      Hot topics in Intellectual Property Rights: The Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit, and Other Developments, Jones Day University
    • September 23, 2015
      Ethics--And Professionalism--In Appellate Practice (3d Annual Joint Appellate Advocacy Training)
    • November 10, 2014
      A Review of the 2013-2014 Decisions of the United States Supreme Court
    • May 16, 2014
      Patent Law 101: How the Supreme Court is Using Subject-Matter Eligibility to Reshape the Entire Patent Statute, AIPLA Spring 2014 Meeting
    • May 8, 2014
      Patents in the Supreme Court: A Tense, Ongoing Dialogue with a Federal Circuit in Flux, Defense Research Institute seminar: "The IP Litigator: Protect, Defend, Prevail"
    • April 2014
      Staying Current in the World of Patent Litigation: A Year (and more) in Review, ABA Intellectual Property Law Section Spring Meeting
    • November 11, 2013
      51st Annual Conference on Intellectual Property Law, Center for American & International Law, Pioneering Women in the Law
    • Fall 2013
      Insights into the Myriad Genetics Decision, Business Development Academy Webinar
    • July 24, 2013
      Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics: Navigating the Isolated DNA Patent Eligibility Jungle, AIPLA Webinar
    • June 18, 2013
      Myriad: Implications of the U.S. Supreme Court Opinion, IPO Webinar
    • June 6, 2013
      The Myriad Case: The Supreme Court and Patent Eligibility
    • April 23, 2013
      Discussion of State Tax Cases, Issues and Policy Matters to Watch in 2013 & Beyond – Including Certain Federal Legislation, Council on State Taxation ("COST") North Atlantic Regional State Tax Meeting
    • November 15, 2012
      National Association of College and University Attorneys—Myriad Genetics, Inc. and Mayo v. Prometheus: Are Diagnostics Ever Patentable?
    • September 24, 2012
      The State of Patent Litigation: A Conversation with the Federal Circuit
    • August 2, 2012
      Emerging Trends in International Intellectual Property Law
    • July 21, 2012
      The Evolving Librarian, American Association of Law Libraries Annual Meeting
    • April 20, 2012
      The Federal Circuit: Guardian of Our Intellectual Property Crown Jewels, ABA CLE Conference
    • April 9, 2012
      Mayo v. Prometheus: Implications for Patent Litigation, Patent Procurement, Personalized Medicine, and the Biotechnology Industry
    • March 28, 2012
      Healthcare 2012: Issues & Answers For A Complex Industry
    • March 28, 2012
      Health Care 2012: Issues and Answers for a Complex Industry
    • March 27, 2012
      An Evening With Greg Castanias and Joan Jarosek: Adding Value to Your Law Firm, Law Library Association of Greater New York
    • February 23, 2012
      Executive Roundtable Series: International Litigation and Arbitration: Offensive and Defensive Trends for Corporate Counsel
    • December 8, 2011
      Corporate Counsel Magazine's 3rd Annual Controlling Legal Costs: Reducing Legal Costs With Cutting-Edge Technology
    • November 16, 2011
      Broadening the Reach of the ITC Big Time: The Federal Circuit Decision in TianRui v. ITC, IPO webinar
    • October 6, 2011
      2011 Speaker Series
      Supreme Court Issues: A Review of Key Cases as the Court Kicks Off the New Term
    • September 22, 2011
      The Myriad Genetics Case, AIPLA webinar
    • July 23, 2011
      Library Management: A Partner's Perspective, American Association of Law Librarians' 2011 Annual Meeting
    • July 14, 2011
      Nature v. Nurture – Lessons from the Federal Circuit About Section 101
    • June 22, 2011
      Patent Litigation after Microsoft v. i4i, IPO webinar
    • February 10, 2011
      A First Look at the 2010 Decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • October 13, 2010
      The Extraterritorial Reach of the U.S. Patent Law after Transocean, IPO webinar
    • October 6-7, 2010
      Issues & Appeals – Supreme Court Review
    • May 20, 2010
      Retroactivity & Retained Refunds: Can They Really Keep Your Money?, Georgetown 2010 Advanced State & Local Tax Institute
    • March 22, 2010
      COST, BNA and Jones Day to Host Commerce Energy Post-Oral Argument Roundtable Discussion & Lunch
    • February 24, 2010
      Preparing for and Arguing Patent Appeals Before the Federal Circuit
    • October 19, 2009
      The Federal Circuit's Recent Decision in Martek v. Lonza: A Discussion About This Biotech Patent Appeal and the Rare Five-Judge Federal Circuit Panel That Decided It.
    • April 1, 2009
      COST, BNA and Jones Day to Host Post-Oral Argument Roundtable Discussion and Lunch
    • November 20, 2008
      High-Stakes Patent Litigation (or, How Lawyers Saved The Entire U.S. Cell-Phone Industry)
    • November 14, 2008
      Fourth Annual Advanced Patent Law Institute, University of Texas, moderator, Judicial Panel
    • June 17, 2008
      Review of the Supreme Court's 2007-2008 Term, moderator, Edward Coke Appellate Inn of Court:
    • June 5, 2008
      Everything You Wanted to Know About Making Partner, but Were Afraid to Ask, panelist, DC Lawyers' Forum
    • April 18, 2008
      The New Private Ordering of Intellectual Property: The Emergence of Contracts as the Drivers of Intellectual Property Rights, panelist, University of Maryland School of Law (Read the accompanying article here.)
    • December 11, 2007
      A Meeting with Leading Antitrust and Patent Experts on Key Mergers, Antitrust, and Patent Cases in Telecom, Media, and Tech
    • November 29, 2007
      An Introduction To Significant Issues In U.S. Law: A Presentation for a Delegation of Lawyers and Officials from Jiangsu Province, China
    • November 28, 2007
      High-Stakes Patent Litigation Practice: Patent Litigation in the International Trade Commission, the Federal Circuit, and the Supreme Court
    • October 12, 2007
      A Meeting with Leading Antitrust and Patent Experts on Key Mergers, Antitrust, and Patent Cases in Telecom, Media, and Tech
    • September 26-27, 2007
      ACI's 9th Advanced Forum on Biotech Patents
    • May 10, 2007
      Supreme Court’s Opinion in KSR Changes Patent Landscape, ALI-ABA Teleseminar
    • April 25, 2007
      The Supreme Court's New Interest in Patent Cases and the Federal Circuit
      http://www.ali-aba.org/aliaba/TWMV01.htm
    • April 3, 2007
      The Supreme Court and Patent Law, and What It Means for IP Appellate Advocacy
    • March 29, 2007
      Ethical Issues in Patent Law, Catholic University
    • February 6, 2007
      Preserving Errors for Appeal in IP Cases
    • January 23, 2007
      Emerging Issues in International Trade and International Law and Litigation: A Presentation for Officials of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce
    • January 17, 2007
      The MedImmune decision and the KSR argument: The Supreme Court Continues its Dialogue With the Federal Circuit
    • September 22, 2006
      KSR v. Teleflex -- The Law of Obviousness: Is a Change Coming from the U.S. Supreme Court?
    • September 19, 2006
      The Implications of United States v. Georgia for States, National Association of Attorneys General, Civil Rights Conference
    • July 20, 2006
      The Implications of the U.S. Supreme Court's Ruling in the Patent Infringement case eBay Inc. v MercExchange LLC, ALI-ABA Telephone Seminar, IP Law Series

    Avant d’envoyer cet e-mail, veuillez prendre note de ce qui suit :

    Les informations contenues sur le site www.jonesday.com sont destinées à un usage général et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques. L’envoi et la réception de cet e-mail n’ont pas pour effet de créer une relation avocat-client. Aucun envoi de votre part à un membre du Cabinet ne sera traité comme confidentiel ou protégé à moins que nous n’ayons donné notre accord pour vous représenter. En envoyant cet e-mail, vous confirmez avoir lu et compris la présente notification.