Timothy Cook

Office Phone:

(617) 526-6000

Direct Phone:

(617) 526-6005


  Pro - Try 1 Week Free
 

    and access,

  •     80K PE/M&A Contacts
  •     +
  •     4.6K PE Firms
  •     3.6K M&A Advisors
  •     198K Transactions
  •     202K Companies

  •     Market Services
  •     Build Lists
  •     Research Sectors
  •     Uncover Opportunities

Bio

Timothy Cook represents life sciences companies in high-stakes intellectual property litigation. He regularly represents innovators in “bet-the-company” cases that are closely watched by national and legal media. On top of a core practice focused on patent litigation of all forms—including litigation between competitors, against non-practicing entities, and with generic and biosimilar manufacturers—Mr. Cook regularly tries licensing and contractual disputes involving life sciences technology. As a former scientist and chemistry teacher, Mr. Cook can deeply analyze the technical issues raised in life sciences litigation and communicate them to lay judges and juries. One court recently praised a technology tutorial that Mr. Cook oversaw as one of the best it had seen. Mr. Cook has tried cases and handled challenging witness examinations involving a wide range of subjects, including gene therapies, drug formulations, purification methods for biological products, biofuels, and many types of pharmaceuticals. Mr. Cook has appeared in all major forums where life sciences IP disputes are litigated, including federal courts across the country, the US Court of Federal Claims, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and the New York Supreme Court Commercial Division. Mr. Cook also regularly advises on multi-jurisdictional disputes, working with foreign counsel to develop and execute strategies to protect clients’ rights around the world. Mr. Cook also maintains an active pro bono practice. He recently served as lead counsel in a Social Security redetermination of benefits hearing that, because of its unusual procedural posture, raised novel administrative and constitutional law questions.

Education