Arthur I. Neustadt
Senior Partner
Tel (703) 413-3000

Arthur I. Neustadt

Senior Partner

ARTHUR I. NEUSTADT is a founding member and a named partner in the firm. He has led the firm’s Litigation practice for many years and has been actively involved in intellectual property (IP) litigation in courts throughout the United States for more than 35 years. He has successfully tried jury and bench cases in varied areas of technology before the federal district courts and argued appeals before the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit and the regional circuit courts of appeal. Mr. Neustadt has lectured widely, both domestically and internationally, on intellectual property litigation. His most famous case is the landmark Festo v. SMC case, which extended over a twenty year period, in which he successfully argued before the Supreme Court of the United States and twice before the en banc Federal Circuit. 

His more recent cases include Ajinomoto v. ADM (multimillion-dollar damages judgment for mutation genetics and recombinant DNA patent), Li v. Toshiba (early semiconductor patent held inequitably procured and attorney fees awarded), Loral Fairchild v. Toshiba (early CCD patent held invalid and not infringed), Medtronic v. Guidant (pioneer reissue patent for treatment of congestive heart failure held valid over recapture challenge), CPI v. St. Jude (jury verdict of patent validity for implantable cardiac defibrillator patent reinstated), Tokyo Keiso v. SMC (volume flowmeter patent held invalid as obvious), and Saint-Gobain v. Xinyi (windshield patents held valid and infringed, double damages and attorney fees awarded).

Mr. Neustadt has been designated by Legal Times as one of the top Washington, D.C. area intellectual property attorneys. Chambers USA has referred to him as a top Washington, D.C. area intellectual property attorney, describing him as “an inspirational and highly creative attorney,” “a true landmark setter,” “known to get great settlements quickly due in part to the good grasp he has of the dynamics of litigation” and “according to competitors, ‘proficient at identifying issues and working with a cost-benefit approach.’” Mr. Neustadt has also been selected by his peers for inclusion in Best Lawyers in America, has been named as a Super Lawyer and was selected as a finalist in the Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America. He has also served on the Intellectual Property Advisory Committee to the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. 

 

Representative Matters

Saint-Gobain Corp. v. Xinyi Glass N.A., Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36129 (N.D. Ohio April 13, 2010) (windshield patents held valid and infringed; double damages and attorney fees awarded). Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc. v. St. Jude Medical, Inc., 576 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (en banc) (implantable cardiac defibrillator patent held valid; invalidity ruling reversed).

GPS Industries Inc. v. Altex Corp., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67480 (N.D. Tex. July 27, 2009) (global positioning system (GPS) patent action dismissed for lack of standing).

Tokyo Keiso v. SMC, 533 F. Supp.2d 1047 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (volume flow meter patent held invalid, affirmed by Federal Circuit).

Medtronic v. Guidant, 465 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. (2006) (pioneer patent for treatment of congestive heart failure held valid).

Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc. v. St. Jude Medical, Inc., 381 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (implantable cardiac defibrillator patent held valid; jury verdict reinstated).

Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzuko Kogyo Kabushiko Co., 344 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2003) en banc (rebuttable presumption of abandonment of claim coverage defined).

Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzuko Kogyo Kabushiko Co., 535 US 722 (2002) (new standard set for prosecution history estoppel to limit doctrine of equivalents).

Loral Fairchild v. Matsushita Elec. Industrial, 208 F. Supp. 2d 344 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (Rader, J.) (early charge coupled device (CCD) patent held invalid and not infringed).

Ajinomoto Co. v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., 228 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (multi-million dollar damages award for mutation genetics and recombinant DNA patent).

Li Second Family Limited Partnership v. Toshiba Corp., 231 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (early semiconductor patent held inequitably procured, attorney fees awarded).

Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzuko Kogyo Kabushiko Co., 234 F.3d 558 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (en banc) (new standard set for prosecution history estoppel to limit doctrine of equivalents).

Biacore v. Thermo Bio-Analysis Corp., 79 F. Supp. 2d 422 (D. Del. 1999) (affinity biosensor patent held valid and infringed; affirmed by Federal Circuit).

Shoketsu Kinzuko Kogyo Kabushiko Co. v. Festo Corp., 520 U.S. 1111 (1997) (petition for writ of certiorari granted; Federal Circuit decision vacated and case remanded (GVR)).

Valutron N.V.  v. NCR Corp., 33 U.S.P.Q.2d 1986 (S.D. Ohio 1992) (electronic accounting system patent action barred by laches; affirmed by Federal Circuit).

Geovision Inc. v. Geovision Corp., 928 F.2d 387 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (geographical information computer display service mark awarded priority).

Car-Freshner Corp. v. Scentex, Inc., 927 F.2d 594 (2d Cir. 1991) (settlement agreement enforced).

NRM Corp. v. Kobe Steel, Ltd., C86-157Y (N.D. Ohio 1987) (tire press patent held non-infringed and inequitably procured).

Jamesbury Corp. v. Litton Industrial Products, Inc., 756 F.2d 1556 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (pioneer ball valve patent held valid).

NCR Corp. v. ELCO Corp., 228 U.S.P.Q. 55 (9th Cir. 1985) (liability for failure to defend patent infringement action).

Loctite Corp. v. Ultraseal Ltd., 781 F.2d 861 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (anaerobic impregnant patent claims construed).

Mississippi Chemical Co. v. Swift Agricultural Chemicals Co., 717 F.2d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (collateral estoppel petition for writ of mandamus granted).

Nippon Electric Glass Co., Ltd. v. Sheldon, 539 F. Supp. 542 (S.D.N.Y. 1982) (x-ray protection patent held invalid).

Dayton-Hudson Corp. v. Dart Drug Corp. 221 U.S.P.Q. 288 (D.D.C. 1982) (junior user entitled to continued use of target mark).

Fund for Government Investors, Inc. v. Government Investors Trust, 215 U.S.P.Q. 54 (E.D. Va. 1981) (money market mutual fund service mark held not confusing).

Jamesbury Corp. v. United States, 207 U.S.P.Q. 131 (Cl. Ct. 1980) (infringement damages for pioneer ball valve patent widely used in nuclear submarine fleet).

Jamesbury Corp. v. Litton Industrial Products, Inc., 586 F.2d 917 (2d Cir. 1978) (“overclaiming” invalidity defense overruled).

Uniflow Mfg. Co. v. King-Sealey Thermos Co., 428 F.2d 335 (6th Cir. 1970) (attorney fee award reversed).

Martindale-Hubbell® AV® Preeminent™ 5.0 out of 5 rating

Best of the Best (2004–2006)

Best Lawyers in America (2006–2012)

Chambers USA (2004-2010), designated one of the top intellectual property attorneys in Virginia

 

Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America, finalist (2007–2010)

Legal Times (2003), designated one of the top intellectual property attorneys in the Washington, D.C. area

Patent Law Expert (1999–2005)

Virginia Super Lawyer (2007–2010)

Washington, D.C. Super Lawyer (2007–2010)