Skip to main content

Marc Cohn is a first-chair jury trial litigator. For more than 20 years, he has been lead and co-lead trial counsel before juries, judges, and arbitration panels in cases involving patent infringement, contracts and license agreements, trade secret misappropriation, Lanham Act, unfair competition, and other business torts. He has examined dozens of witnesses on the stand, including experts on technical, medical, regulatory, economic, and accounting matters, as well as company executives, inventors, and sales/marketing personnel. He has also been co-lead in more than a half dozen Federal Circuit appeals, and has appeared before the United States Patent Office in inter partes review proceedings. Marc has managed multi-jurisdictional patent infringement wars involving claims in the U.S., Germany, UK, Netherlands, Ireland, and Canada. He has also participated in setting strategy for European Patent Office oppositions and attended EPO arguments.

With his academic background in Engineering Physics and electrical engineering, Marc understands technologies at a deep level, and has a talent for teaching complicated ideas to clients and factfinders.

Unlike many patent lawyers, who focus on technical issues, Marc understands that a jury decides cases based on their emotional connection to the client's witnesses as human beings. The jury needs to put themselves in the client's shoes, to feel their motivations and good intentions from a perspective of empathy. Marc identifies important human themes early in the case so as to set trial strategy based on the "story of our client."

In addition to litigation, Marc also advises clients on intellectual property valuation and litigation risk, including economic modelling of potential damages and claims. He has conducted these assessments in myriad contexts, e.g., as part of M&A due diligence, potential investments by large banks, potential suits that might be brought by or against our clients, and prosecution of new patent claims.

Marc has been retained as an "advocate in residence" for small companies to project-manage written submissions, oral presentations, and the building of expert teams on medical, statistical, and regulatory matters. His background in applied physics and statistics enables him to bridge the communication gap between technical experts and the outside world. Marc has drafted and delivered presentations on behalf of client executives for their Boards, investors, and employees, as well as to regulators, Congresspersons, and the public. He has project-managed key regulatory submissions to FDA, Health Canada, and the European Medicines Agency, and he has assisted in preparing SEC filings, drafted press releases, and reviewed medical journal manuscripts, among other forms of oral and written advocacy.


  • Boston Scientific v. Cook Group. Secured a complete plaintiff’s win for our client Boston Scientific with a US$158 million jury verdict in a patent litigation between competitors in the endoscopy space. The jury found Boston Scientific’s patents valid and infringed, that Cook’s infringement had been willful, and awarded the full amount of damages sought by our client.
  • Entropic Communications v. Charter Communications, et. al. Represented Charter Communications in a six-patent, multi-billion dollar case in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Hologic v. Minerva. For Hologic as plaintiff, obtained summary judgment that the defendant Minerva was liable for patent infringement, a favorable jury verdict on damages, and a complete defense verdict on all counterclaims.
  • Boston Scientific v. Nevro. For Boston Scientific, obtained complete defense victory on summary judgment.
  • TC Technologies v. Sprint. Represented TC Technologies asserting a patent covering LTE cellular technology against Sprint Communications. (2019)
  • Nordic v. Leading Mobile Phone Manufacturer. Represented leading mobile phone manufacturer in a multi-patent defense in the Western District of Texas, resulting in a settlement very favorable to our client.
  • Inflow v. Boston Scientific. Won complete defense victory for Boston Scientific against a claim for US$105 million for patent infringement relating to coronary stents.
  • [Confidential Claimant] v. Hologic. Defeated arbitration claim, in excess of US$25 million, against Hologic for expansion of royalty base and term under a license agreement relating to diagnostic kits.
  • [Confidential Claimant] v. GE Healthcare. Won defense victory for GE Healthcare against claim for tens of millions of dollars in royalties for magnetic resonance imaging technology.
  • GE Healthcare v. ABI. Won complete plaintiff's victory for GE Healthcare in an arbitration involving the interpretation of a license agreement relating to DNA sequencing reagents and kits. GE was awarded past damages based on an increase in royalty rates for certain products, plus interest, fees, and costs. Total judgment exceeded US$30 million.
  • Freedom Wireless Inc. v. Verizon Wireless. In multi-defendant suit involving patents on telecommunications systems and equipment, represented only victorious defendant.
  • Manufacturer of miniature electronic amplifiers and pulse-width control systems in defending a series of patent and trade secret suits and arbitrations, and obtained walkaway settlement.
  • Boston Scientific v. Cook/Guidant. The court granted Boston Scientific's motion for summary judgment and entered a permanent injunction barring Cook and Guidant from collaborating to exploit licensed technology in the multi-billion dollar drug-eluting stent market.
  • Boston Scientific v. Medtronic. Won judgment for Boston Scientific in excess of US$160 million and secured permanent injunction against future infringing sales of coronary stent systems.
  • Kimberly-Clark v. Procter & Gamble. Represented Procter & Gamble in the "diaper wars" arbitration in defense of a patent infringement claim against Pampers diapers. The arbitration panel found the patent-at-issue invalid, and the panel's opinion was upheld on appeal.
  • Bonzel v. Pfizer, et al. Represented Boston Scientific in Minnesota state and federal cases involving a claim for over US$400 million relating to the interpretation of a patent license agreement. The state and federal courts dismissed the cases for forum non conveniens in favor of a German forum. Affirmed by the Minnesota Court of Appeals and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.


The Legal 500 U.S.
Patent Litigation: Full Coverage (2018, 2021)



  • J.D., University of Virginia School of Law, 2000
  • B.S., Applied and Engineering Physics, Cornell University, 1997, cum laude


  • District of Columbia
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit