Wasim K. Bleibel

Wasim Bleibel represents biotechnology, pharmaceutical, beverage, cosmetic, medical device and software companies in intellectual property litigation, intellectual property strategy and regulatory matters.

Wasim has significant experience representing both patent owners and accused infringers in complex patent litigation matters. He has been involved in numerous contested proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board and those arising under the Hatch-Waxman Act.

Wasim also regularly provides strategic advice to major corporations, mid-size companies, startups, and other publicly traded and privately held businesses to ensure compliance with relevant marketing and advertising regulations, including those arising under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, Federal Trade Commission Act and industry organizations. He also assists those companies on social media policies, influencer agreements, endorsements, brand protection and brand strategy.

Wasim also represents companies in the seed and agricultural biotechnology industries in connection with regulatory, intellectual property, liability and transactional matters. Among the types of clients Wasim has represented are biotechnology trait providers, seed producers, seed dealers, seed distributors, and seedsmen's errors and omissions insurers.

Wasim also has significant experience involving patent and trademark litigation and prosecution in other areas, including agricultural biotechnology, mechanical devices, chemical formulations and medical devices.

Prior to his legal career, Wasim was a senior research scientist at the University of Chicago, where he worked to identify genetic determinants contributing to a patient's sensitivity to chemotherapeutic agents. His contributions resulted in his laboratory being the first to demonstrate that drug sensitivity to chemotherapy is a heritable genetic trait and that these responses vary across and within founder populations.

Wasim’s experience includes: 

• The Regents of the University of California et al. v. The Broad Institute Inc. et al., Interference No. 106, 115, before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board – Representing The Broad Institute, Inc. in the second patent interference proceeding involving claims to CRISPR-CAS9 systems for use in eukaryotic cells
• The Broad Institute, Inc. et al. v. ToolGen, Inc., Interference No. 106,126
• Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. et al. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. et al., (D. Del.) – Representing drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations indicated for the treatment of major depressive disorder and schizophrenia
• In re ʼ858 Patent Litigation, (S.D. Ind.) – Representing renewable energy company in patent litigation concerning the production of clean burning ethanol
• GS CleanTech Corp. v. Adkins Energy LLC (N.D. Ill.) – Representing renewable energy company on contract-based claims
• Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc., (D.N.J. Settled) – Represented drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations indicated for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension
• Impax Laboratories v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. et al., (D.N.J. Settled) – Represented drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations indicated for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease
• Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co., Ltd. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., (D.N.J. Settled) – Represented drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations indicated for the treatment of schizophrenia, depression and depression associated with bipolar disorder
• Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. et al., (D.N.J. Settled) – Represented drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning injectable medication indicated for the treatment and prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting
• Shire Development LLC, et al. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. et al., (D. Del.) – Represented drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations indicated for the treatment of ulcerative colitis
• Feit Electric Company, Inc. v. Beacon Point Capital, LLC, ( N.D. Ill.) – Represented light bulb manufacturer Feit Electric Co., Inc., in declaratory judgment action involving a variety of electrical circuit and hardware patents
• Hawk Technology Systems, LLC v. Gold Coast Group, Ltd., (N.D. Ill. Settled) – Represented defendant in patent infringement suit involving software and method patents
• eDekka LLC v. Lovely Skin, Inc., (E.D. Tex. Settled) – Represented defendant Lovely Skin, Inc., in patent infringement action involving software patents
• Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc., (S.D.N.Y.) – Represented generic drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations of opioids indicated for the treatment of pain
• Warner Chilcott Company LLC v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. et al., (D. Del. Settled) – Represented generic drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations indicated for the treatment of ulcerative colitis
• Depomed, Inc. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. et al., (D.N.J. Settled) – Represented generic drug manufacturer in Hatch-Waxman litigation concerning oral formulations indicated for the treatment of Post-Herpetic Neuralgia