Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison
Firm overview:
With US offices in DC, Los Angeles, New York and Wilmington, Paul Weiss takes on the most consequential matters from industry-leading clients. A core characteristic is the firm’s ability and confidence to go to trial. The firm’s Patent Litigation practice handles jury and bench trials, arbitrations, Section 337 litigations and inter partes review (IPR) proceedings as well appellate litigation.
The team’s broad base of technical expertise includes biologics; communications, electronics and computing products; consumer goods; industrial technologies; medical devices; and pharmaceuticals.
Team overview:
Trial lawyers, former patent examiners and Federal Circuit law clerks, and attorneys with doctorates are part of the team at Paul Weiss. In November 2024, the firm welcomed Elizabeth Stotland Weiswasser and Anish Desai to its Litigation Department in the New York office, from rival firm Weil Gotshal & Manges.
Weiswasser, who co-chairs Paul Weiss’ Litigation department, is particularly known for her involvement in high-profile disputes involving life sciences companies. She joined Weil Gotshal as a summer associate in 1991 and rejoined as an associate in 1994. Laterly, she was co-chair of Litigation.
First-chair trial lawyer Desai has served as lead counsel in more than 100 IPR proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and handles disputes concerning a wide range of technologies.
Key matters:
- Arm v. Qualcomm, 22-cv-01146, US District Court, District of Delaware (Wilmington
In December 2024 Paul Weiss won a jury verdict for client Qualcomm in a breach of contract suit brought by UK-based chip designer Arm, owned by SoftBank. The dispute concerned a technology licence agreement with Qualcomm subsidiary Nuvia. A Delaware jury found that Qualcomm did not breach the terms of Nuvia’s chip architecture licensing agreement with Arm and that its chips were properly licensed under Qualcomm’s own licence with Arm.
In a statement Qualcomm said: “The jury has vindicated Qualcomm’s right to innovate and affirmed all the Qualcomm products at issue in the case are protected by Qualcomm’s contract with Arm.”
An ARM spokesperson commented: “We are disappointed the jury was unable to reach consensus across the claims. We intend to seek a re-trial due to the jury’s deadlock. From the outset, our top priority has been to protect Arm’s IP and the unparalleled ecosystem we have built with our valued partners over more than 30 years.”
Attorneys for Plaintiffs - Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor; Anne Gaza, Robert Vrana and Samantha Wilson, Wilmington, Delaware; Morrison & Foerster; Michael Jacobs, Joyce Liou and Diek Van Nort, San Francisco, Erik Olson, Palo Alto, Scott Llewellyn, Denver.
Attorneys for Defendants - Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnel; Jack Blumenfeld and Jennifer Ying, Wilmington, Delaware; Of Counsel - Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; Karen Dunn, William Isaacson, Erin Morgan and Melissa Zappala, DC.
Clients:
Genentech, Edwards Life Sciences, Qualcomm.
