Chad A. Landmon
Email Page
{ Bio Portrait }


TEL CT - 860.275.8170
TEL2 DC - 202.721.5415
FAX CT - 860.275.8101
FAX2 DC - 202.912.4701
Washington, DC
Download V-Card

Chad Landmon chairs Axinn's Intellectual Property and Food and Drug Administration Practice Groups and focuses his practice on patent litigation and counseling and food and drug law, with an emphasis on pharmaceuticals, biologics and human tissue products. He maintains a particular focus on Paragraph IV patent litigation, having litigated dozens of cases and served as lead trial attorney in numerous cases involving a wide variety of products, including on many blockbuster products. By coupling his patent litigation experience with his FDA expertise, Chad enables pharmaceutical clients to develop and execute on patent and FDA strategies to bring products to market in the most efficient and profitable manner. 

Chad's FDA matters involve petitioning FDA and litigating issues relating to the Hatch-Waxman Act, including marketing exclusivities, patent listing, certification and notification requirements, bioequivalence, labeling and other issues relevant to the FDA drug approval process. His active FDA litigation practice has enabled clients to maintain their exclusivity rights and obtain market entry. In fact, Chad led the efforts to obtain a court order that has been described as the first time a court has ordered FDA to approve a product. 

With a practice that also includes matters involving the intersection of the antitrust and patent laws, such as issues arising from the settlement of patent and Hatch-Waxman exclusivity disputes, Chad frequently speaks and writes about issues relating to the Hatch-Waxman Act and litigation in the life sciences industry.  

More » « Less

Professional Activities

  • American Bar Association, Section of Intellectual Property Law
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Connecticut Bar Association
  • Connecticut Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Food and Drug Law Institute, Medical Products Committee (2018-2020)
  • Hartford County Bar Association
  • Law360 Life Sciences Editorial Advisory Board (2018-2019)


  • Coupling patent litigation and FDA strategy, represented Zydus Pharmaceuticals in defending patent cases involving multiple patents directed to the blockbuster drug Abilify® (aripiprazole). Successfully fought off a temporary restraining order and obtained a favorable claim construction and non-infringement judgment at both the District Court and the Federal Circuit. At the same time, successfully defeated a lawsuit initiated by the brand company against the Food and Drug Administration, which sought to exclude Zydus and others from going to market for years, based upon a claim to orphan drug exclusivity.
  • Obtained favorable decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to enable Watson Laboratories (now Teva) to speed its generic version of Celebrex® to market. An earlier lower court decision had effectively barred Watson and others from bringing their drugs to market. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the district court’s decision and the FDA’s determination, finding that Watson and another companies were eligible to share in a period of 180-day marketing exclusivity on the launch of their generic versions of Celebrex®, because a reissued patent was not part of the same “bundle of rights” as an original patent.
  • Advanced a novel argument on behalf of client Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., convincing FDA to grant final approval of Endo’s generic Valcyte® product and successfully intervening in a lawsuit brought by a third party to challenge FDA’s decision. The decisions by FDA and the US District Court for the District of Columbia opened up the lucrative Valcyte® and Nexium® markets to generic competition, providing significant savings to consumers and payers.
  • In what has been described as the first time a court has ever ordered FDA to approve a product, Axinn secured summary judgment on behalf of Watson Laboratories, Inc. in litigation against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The case involved a dispute over the 180-day "first-to-file" marketing exclusivity for generic versions of the multi-billion dollar product Actos (pioglitazone hydrochloride).  The court's ruling includes an order that paved the way for the company to bring its generic diabetes drug to market.
  • Provided patent and FDA counseling on numerous biosimilar products in order to assist clients with biosimilar product development efforts and to navigate the "patent dance" and FDA approval issues under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act.
  • After trying the patent case, obtained a favorable settlement that will enable Actavis to bring its generic version of Shire's ADHD product Intuniv to market. Through the course of the litigation and after conducting aggressive fact discovery, Shire dedicated its core method of use patent to the public, removing it from further dispute in the litigation. 
  • Obtained a favorable decision for our client, Alvogen, Inc. after intervening in an action against FDA by a competitor over generic versions of the antibiotic Vancocin. The competitor requested a preliminary injunction that would have forced Alvogen's generic version of Vancocin off the market.  Within less than a week, Axinn successfully moved to intervene, submitted opposition papers, and defeated the request for preliminary injunction, allowing Alvogen's version of Vancocin to remain on the market. 
  • Provided extensive counseling to a human tissue company developing platform technology using adult stem cells.  Such counseling has enabled the client to design around others' patents, secure its own patent protection and negotiate a license in a critical technology area at a fraction of the demanded royalty.  
  • Obtained a dismissal of a Lanham claim brought by Wyeth against Sun Pharmaceutical relating to the blockbuster drug Protonix.  The case involved allegations that Sun was engaged in false advertising in marketing its generic product.  The case was dismissed based upon an argument that the claims were preempted by FDA law. 
  • Successfully negotiated an extensive patent license and product distribution agreement relating to a blockbuster product. Chad was brought in to negotiate the agreement on the eve of trial given the complexities of the patent, FDA and business issues.


  • Benchmark Litigation – CT Litigation Star: Intellectual Property (2020) 
  • LMG Life Sciences – Life Sciences Star (2019)
  • Law360 "Rising Star, Intellectual Property" (2013, 2014)
  • Super Lawyers (2013-2019)
  • Connecticut Law Tribune "New Leaders in the Law" (2012)
  • Hartford Business Journal "40 Under 40" (2011)
  • Super Lawyers, Connecticut Rising Star (2009-2012)


Thought Leadership



  • JD – University of Connecticut School of Law (1999)
  • BA, summa cum laude – University of Connecticut (1996)


  • Connecticut
  • District of Columbia
  • US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
  • US District Court District of Columbia
  • US District Court District of Connecticut
  • US District Court Eastern District of Michigan
  • US District Court Southern District of New York