Significant representative matters include:

• Forest Labs, Inc. et al. v. Cobalt Labs, Inc. et al.,Civil Action Nos. 08-21-GMS-LPS and 08-52-GMS-LPS (D.Del) (trial counsel in multiple defendant ANDA case on behalf of Forest and Merz concerning clients’ Alzheimer’s drug Namenda®).
• Sanofi-aventis et al. v. Actavis et al., Civil Action No. 07-572 (GMS) (D. Del.) (trial counsel in multiple defendant ANDA case on behalf of Sanofi-aventis concerning client’s drug Uroxatral®; obtained judgment for client after bench trial).
• Galderma et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Civil Action No. 09-184 (JJF) (D. Del.) (trial counsel in ANDA case on behalf of Galderma concerning client’s drug Oracea®; obtained preliminary injunction for client).
• Forest Labs., Inc. et al. v. Ivax Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et. al., Civil Action No. 03-891 (JJF) (D. Del.) (trial counsel in ANDA case on behalf of Forest and Lundbeck concerning clients’ blockbuster anti-depression drug LEXAPRO®; obtained judgment for clients).
• Forest Labs., Inc. et al. v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Inc., Civil Action No. 06-13143 (E.D. Mich.) (BAJ) (trial counsel for Forest and Lundbeck in ANDA case concerning clients’ blockbuster anti-depression drugLEXAPRO®).
• Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Inc. v. Forest Labs, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 07-10737 (E.D. Mich.) (BAJ) (trial counsel for Forest and Lundbeck in declaratory judgment ANDA action concerning clients’ blockbuster anti-depression drug LEXAPRO®).
• PDL Biopharma, Inc. v. Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Civil Action No. 07-156 (MPT) (D. Del.) (trial counsel for Alexion in patent infringement case involving client’s drug Soliris® and humanized antibody technologies).
• Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation v. Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Civil Action No. 07-163 (GKF) (N.D. Okla.) (trial counsel for Alexion in case involving client’s drug Soliris® and humanized antibody technologies).
• Reliant Pharmaceuticals, Inc./ GlaxoSmithKline v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., Civil Action No. 06-774 (D. Del) (JJF) (trial counsel for Reliant in ANDA litigation concerning client’s anti-arrhythmia drug Rythmol® SR).
• Schering Corporation v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd. and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., Civil Action No. 06-14386 (E.D. Mich.) (JAC) (litigation counsel for Schering in ANDA litigation concerning client’s drug Clarinex®).
• Proctor v. Transkaryotic Therapies, Inc. (“TKT”), Civil Action No. 05-CV-1737 (BEN) (S.D. Cal.) (trial counsel for TKT in its defense of inventorship claims regarding its pioneering targeted gene activation technology; obtained dismissal of case on jurisdictional grounds).
• Applied Research Sys. ARS Holding, N.V. v. Cell Genesys, Inc. and Transkaryotic Therapies, Inc. (“TKT”), Civil Action No. 1:04-CV-11810 (MLW) (D. Mass) (trial counsel for TKT in its defense to patent infringement claims brought by Serono subsidiary ARS regarding targeted gene activation technology).
• Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc. (now “Aventis”) and Transkaryotic Therapies, Inc. (“Amgen I”), Civil Action 97-CV-10814 (WGY) (D. Mass.) (trial counsel for Aventis/TKT in 4-month bench trial concerning recombinant erythropoietin and gene activation technology).
• Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc. (now “Aventis”) and Transkaryotic Therapies, Inc. (“Amgen II”), Civil Action 97-CV-10814 (WGY) (D. Mass.) (trial counsel for Aventis/TKT in 1-month bench trial on remand concerning recombinant erythropoietin and gene activation technology; argued all summary judgment motions).
• Purdue Pharma L.P. et al. v. Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Civil Action No. 00-8029 (SHS) (S.D.N.Y.) (trial counsel for Purdue in 1-month bench trial in ANDA case re: controlled-release oxycodone opioid analgesic).
• Purdue Pharma L.P. et al. v. Boehringer Ingelheim et al.,Civil Action No. 99-3658 (SHS) (S.D.N.Y.) (trial counsel for Purdue in infringement case involving controlled-release oxycodone opioid analgesic).
• Biogen, Inc. v. Schering AG and Berlex Labs., Inc., Civil Action Nos. 96-CV-10916, 96-CV-12487, and 98-CV-11728 (MLW) (D. Mass.) (co-lead counsel in consolidated cases concerning recombinant interferon-ß used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis).
• AstraZeneca v. Faulding Pharmaceutical Co., Civil Action No. 03-6487 (WHP) (S.D.N.Y.) (litigation counsel in ANDA case concerning propofol formulations).
• Biogen, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. and Hoffman La-Roche, Inc., Civil Action No. 96-10862 (MEL) (D. Mass.) (litigation counsel in case involving recombinant a-interferon).
• Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharmaceuticals Tech. Corp., Civil Action No. 01-4556 (DMC) (D.N.J.) (litigation counsel in ANDA case concerning ribavarin).
• Schering Corp. v. Three Rivers Pharmaceuticals, Civil Action No. 01-1894 (GLL) (W.D. Pa.) (litigation counsel in ANDA case concerning ribavarin).
• Gentex, Inc. v. Donnelly Corp., Civil Action No. 5:92-CV-84 (BFG) (W.D. Mich.) (trial counsel in 4-week jury trial concerning automatic dimming electrochromic rearview mirrors).
• Donnelly Corp. v. Gentex, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:93-CV-530 (RAE) (W.D. Mich.) (took or defended over 50 depositions as second-year associate in case concerning automatic dimming electrochromic rearview mirrors having lights and compasses).
• Infinitech, Inc. v. Vitrophage, Inc., Civil Action No.93-2846 (JFG) (N.D. Ill.) (ran case concerning artificial vitreous fluid comprising perfluorocarbons on day-to-day basis as second-year associate; argued discovery and jurisdictional motions).
• Block Drug, Inc. v. Orthovita, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 96-CV-82 (MMP) (N.D. Fla.) (appellate counsel in case concerning dental implants).
• Micro Motion, Inc. v. Endress + Hauser, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 98-N-36 (D. Colo.) (litigation counsel in case involving electronic circuitry used to measure mass flow through conduits).
• AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc., Civil Action No. 96-434 (SLR) (D. Del.) (litigation counsel in case involving long distance telephone billing systems).
• Al-Site Corp. v. Accessories Associates, Inc., Civil Action No. 92-6544 (JSM) (S.D.N.Y.) (litigation counsel in case involving retail eyeglass displays; argued summary judgment motions).

• Mr. Flattmann is a member of the American Bar Association, the American Intellectual Property Law Association, the Federal Circuit Bar Association, and the New York Intellectual Property Law Association.
• He is a member of the State Bars of New York and the District of Columbia, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

• Harvard Law School, J.D., 1992, (cum laude, Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology.)
• Yale University, B.S. in Biology, 1989 (magna cum laude)