Sona De

SONA DE is a nationally recognized trial lawyer who has led numerous victories in both bench and jury trials through appeal. Her nearly 30 years of practice spans a range of cases in various technology sectors, with a focus on life sciences disputes involving biologics, pharma/Hatch-Waxman litigation, medical devices/med-tech, crop science/agribusiness, chemicals, and consumer goods. She has also argued before the Multidistrict Litigation Panel, represented clients in arbitration, and defended witnesses overseas under the Hague Convention. Her work has earned wide recognition, including Chambers USA IP ranking for her “notable track record” in life sciences litigation (2021–2026), LMG Life Sciences (2019–2025), IAM Patent 1000 (2017–2026), three LMG patent “Impact Case of the Year” awards, The American Lawyer’s “Litigator of the Week,” and The National Law Journal’s “Verdicts Hall of Fame.” among others.

“Sona has a great courtroom presence. She is also incredibly smart and good at determining strategy.”
Chambers USA 2026

In biologics, Sona represented Bayer HealthCare in its jury trial and appeal wins against Baxalta’s flagship hemophilia product. The jury handed Bayer a complete victory across every liability issue and awarded the largest damages verdict in Delaware for a biologic, rising to US$182 million after the District Court awarded supplemental damages through final judgment. Her segment of the closing argument countered Baxalta’s non-infringement and invalidity defenses. In a sweeping 37-page precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed in Bayer’s favor on every issue that Baxalta appealed, citing Sona’s direct examination of various experts and cross examination of Baxalta's primary technical expert at trial. The case was inducted into The National Law Journal’s “Verdicts Hall of Fame” (2019), and won LMG Life Sciences’ 2019 “Patent Impact Case of the Year.” and was selected as a “Legal Lion” by Law360 (2019) for continued success in post-trial motions.

“Sona is experienced, smart, and responsive. She knows how to win cases.”
Chambers USA 2023

Sona also represented Amgen/Immunex in its trial win against Sandoz’s biosimilar of Enbrel®, the first time a biologics maker has fully succeeded in blocking a biosimilar under the Biologics Act through the courts. This marked a watershed moment for branded biologics protection. Following a stipulation on infringement and a nearly month-long trial on numerous validity challenges, the district court found in Amgen’s favor across the board. The Federal Circuit affirmed. The case won LMG Life Sciences’ 2020 “Impact Case of the Year.”

In the medical device/med-tech space, Sona helped reshape how courts evaluate patent enforceability in the landmark Therasense case on electrochemical blood glucose meters. She was featured as “Litigator of the Week” by The American Lawyer (2015) and received the Financial Times’ Standout “Lawyers to the Innovators” highest ranking (2012) for her role in the innovative strategies that drove the outcome. Therasense set a new legal standard for the inequitable conduct doctrine and was named one of the “Top 10 Patent Decisions of the Decade” (2020) by Law360.

"Sona is a sophisticated trial lawyer who knows how to get her point across without being abrasive. She had the best cross-examination of an expert witness I have seen.”
Chambers USA 2022

In Hatch-Waxman litigation, she was profiled by InsideCounsel for her role in Bayer HealthCare’s trial win on a formulation patent based on the doctrine of equivalents. Her work for the University of Texas and Purdue in serial trials against multiple generics on three different patent families also won LMG Life Sciences’ 2013 “Hatch-Waxman Impact Case of the Year." Her prior work experience in the pharmaceutical industry enables Sona to represent clients on various patent issues with an understanding of how companies operate.

Honors & Awards:

• Chambers USA —  Intellectual Property: Patent - New York (2021–2026)
• The American Lawyer’s “Litigator of the Week” (2015)
• The National Law Journal’s “Verdicts Hall of Fame” (2019)
• LMG Life Sciences General Patent Litigation (2019–2025)
• LMG Life Sciences’ 2017 shortlist for “General Patent Litigator of the Year” in New York
• LMG’s Patent “Impact Case of the Year” Awards (2013, 2019, 2020)
• The New York Times Magazine’s “Top Women Attorneys in the New York Metro Area”  (2013–2015)
• IAM Patent 1000 (2017–2026)
• Legal 500 United States — Healthcare: Life Sciences (2017)
• Who’s Who Legal IP (2023)
• Financial Times’ Standout “Lawyers to the Innovators” (2012)
• In Motion’s Commitment to Justice Award (2012)
• The New York Times Magazine’s New York Super Lawyers® (2013–2026)
• UCLA’s Chemistry & Biochemistry Departmental Alumni Legacy Award (2026)
• The New York Times Magazine’s International Super Lawyers “Business Edition” (2013)

• Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc., et al. (D.Del.): Represented plaintiff Bayer in a multi-million dollar biologics jury trial win against Baxalta’s flagship hemophilia drug, Adynovate®. Following a six-day trial involving 18 witnesses, the jury found in favor of Bayer across the board on infringement and validity of all asserted claims and awarded over US$155 million in damages for past infringement. Secured an additional US$27 million in post-verdict supplemental damages and interest, bringing total damages to US$182 million - a damages award that ranks among the top 10 largest Delaware patent verdicts in the last decade and is the largest biotech patent verdict in that court.
• Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc., et al. (CAFC): Represented appellee Bayer to secure unanimous affirmance on every issue Baxalta appealed. The opinion addressed the scope of disclaimer in claim construction, use of FDA submissions to establish infringement, use of the trial record to overcome enablement challenges, the ability to present a range of potential royalty rates for damages to the jury without specifying a number therein, and a district court’s ability to apply the jury’s chosen rate from within that range for supplemental damages without violating the Seventh Amendment.  
• Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. et al. (D.N.J.): Represented plaintiff Amgen and its subsidiary Immunex in a two-week patent trial win against a biosimilar to Enbrel®, the first FDA-approved tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor fusion protein. Sandoz stipulated to infringement on the eve of trial, and challenged the validity of Amgen’s biotech patents on a variety of grounds. The court found in favor of Amgen/Immunex on all issues. Affirmed on appeal.
• Baxalta Inc., Baxalta U.S., and Nektar Therapeutics v. Bayer HealthCare LLC (D.Del.): Represented defendant Bayer HealthCare in a high-stakes competitor case involving the assertion by Nektar Therapeutics and Baxalta of two patent families comprising 12 patents against Bayer for the sale of Bayer’s Jivi® biologic for the treatment of hemophilia. Settled after asserted claims were significantly reduced through depositions and successful summary judgment and the court denied Plaintiffs’ serial motions to dismiss Bayer’s inequitable conduct, unclean hands, and antitrust counterclaims. 
• Amgen v. Amneal et al. (Fed. Cir.): Represented plaintiff-appellant Amgen in serial appeals before the Federal Circuit in abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) litigation on formulation patent against numerous generic defendants. Amgen’s drug Sensipar® embodied the patented invention to treat secondary hyperthyroidism Secured reversal of a claim construction and non-infringement judgment against competitor while affirming infringement against another.
• Boston Scientific Corp. et al. v. Nevro Corp. (D. Del.): Represented Nevro in multi-patent and trade secret litigation relating to high-frequency spinal cord stimulation technology to treat pain. First trial in series of cases resulted in non-infringement verdict in Nevro’s favor on two patents. The parties then reached settlement that concludes all of the existing litigations and includes a net payment from Boston Scientific to Nevro of US$85 million.  
• Merck & Co., Inc. et al. v. Merck KGaA (D.N.J.): Representing Merck & Co., Inc. in a trademark and breach of contract case regarding the use of the name “Merck” in the United States. 
• Huvepharma EOOD et al. v. Koninklijke DSM et al. (D.Del.): Lead counsel for defendants in patent case involving animal feed additives alleged to be made overseas via patented biologic process. Dismissed with prejudice following rulings that would invalidate the patent.
• Illumina Inc. v. APExBIO Technology LLC (S.D. Tex.): Represented Illumina in patent case involving methods for modifying nucleic acids. Competitor sold kits and instructed customers on method of kit use. Obtained early injunction against future infringement and favorable settlement on past claims.
• Beckman Coulter v. Gen-Probe (TTAB): Lead counsel for Beckman Coulter in trademark opposition regarding the use of the mark “Access” in connection with nucleotide and molecular assays. Secured settlement following entry of Beckman’s case-in-chief in trial phase. 
• Therasense, Inc. (Abbott Laboratories) v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. and Nova Biomedical Corp. (N.D. Cal.): Represented defendants in successful six-year patent suit on four different patents involving diabetes blood glucose monitors that culminated in back-to-back trials. Won summary judgments of non-infringement and/or invalidity on the first two patents and summary judgment of no literal infringement on the third patent. Won the bench trial finding the third patent invalid and unenforceable and secured attorney’s fees. Won the jury trial finding the fourth patent invalid and not literally infringed. Judgment on all patents affirmed in BD/Nova’s favor on appeal. Won remand following en banc rehearing on inequitable conduct of third patent.
• Roche Diagnostics Operations, Inc. et al. v. Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc. et al. (D. Del.; Fed. Cir.): Represented defendant Nova Biomedical Corp. in a patent suit involving diabetes blood glucose monitors. Won summary judgment dismissing all patent issues based on a successful claim construction. The case was appealed and remanded for further proceedings. Secured successful claim construction again on remand and through second appeal. Affirmed on appeal.
• Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals et al. v. Glenmark Generics Ltd. et al. (D. Del.): Represented plaintiffs in a successful ANDA trial involving topical gel formulation patent. Bayer’s drug Finacea® embodied the patented invention to treat rosacea. Defendants had substituted out two of the claimed ingredients in the accused product to avoid literally infringing the patent-in-suit, rendering this a doctrine of equivalents case from the start. Defendants raised non-infringement, estoppel, ensnarement, and obviousness defenses. Won the trial finding the patent valid and infringed. Affirmed on appeal.
• Leo Pharmaceutical v. River’s Edge Pharmaceutical (D. Atl.): Represented plaintiff in an ANDA case involving a formulation patent on Bayer’s topical dermatological drug Desonate®. Successfully foreclosed defenses at pre-trial evidentiary hearing on claim construction and validity. Settled on the eve of trial after securing that decision. 
• Arbitration (UNCITRAL): Successfully represented claimant in international dispute involving distribution agreements for analytic medical device. Obtained early judgment dismissing respondent’s counterclaims, leaving no dispute against client’s claims.   
• Williams v. O’Gorman et al., (N.D.N.Y.): Led landmark civil rights jury trial win against highest ranking New York State Prison officials for keeping plaintiff in solitary confinement for almost nine years. Won unanimous jury verdict finding defendants violated the U.S. Constitution’s 8th Amendment ban against cruel and unusual punishment. Won jury award of both compensatory and punitive damages. This trial victory marked the jury verdict on solitary confinement in New York state in a quarter century, and the first time that solitary confinement in New York state prisons was found cruel and unusual under the high standards required to prove an 8th Amendment violation.
• Sandoz v. Boehringer Ingelheim International GMBH (PTAB): Collaborated with patent owner to successfully defend an antibody drug formulation patent against a PGR challenge based on enablement and written description grounds. Secured denial of institution and defeated Sandoz’s subsequent request for rehearing.
• Purdue Pharma L.P. et al. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc. et al. and related cases (S.D.N.Y.): Represented plaintiffs in a series of three trials, each of which involved multiple generic drug manufacturers, on abuse-deterrent oral analgesic. Won infringement issues at trial. Affirmed on appeal.
• Purdue Pharma Products L.P. et al. v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. et al. (D. Del.): Represented plaintiffs in an ANDA trial involving a 24-hour oral analgesic. Won infringement and enforceability issues at trial. Affirmed on appeal.
• Multidistrict Litigation No. 2126: In re Tramadol Hydrochloride Extended-Release Tablets Patent Litigation (J.P.M.L.): Successfully argued for plaintiffs before the Multidistrict Litigation Panel to consolidate ANDA suits against various generics involving a 24-hour oral analgesic.
• King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc. et al. (D. Del.): Represented plaintiffs in an ANDA trial involving an automatic injector device for epinephrine. Settled following trial.
• Arbitration (JAMS): Successfully represented respondent/counter-claimant in dispute involving supply agreement for analytic medical device.  
• Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd. v. MediaTek, Inc. et al. (C.D. Cal.): Represented the plaintiffs in a patent suit involving chips for CD and DVD drives. Won summary judgment dismissing the counterclaim patent based on a successful claim construction. Settled on the eve of trial.
• Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. (S.D.N.Y.): Represented plaintiffs in a successful nine-year patent litigation against multiple generic drug manufacturers involving an oral analgesic. Focused on antitrust issues. Defended foreign witnesses on patent liability issues under the Hague Convention. 
• AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals v. Mayne Pharma (USA) Inc. (S.D.N.Y.): Represented plaintiff in a successful ANDA trial involving an anesthetic. Won the trial finding patents infringed, enforceable, and valid. Affirmed on appeal.
• Zeneca v. Rhone Poulenc (D.Del.): Represented Zeneca in patent litigation involving corn herbicide and chemical safener. Settled favorably on eve of trial.
• Monsanto v. Zeneca (D.Del.): Litigation involving patent license to Roundup Ready seeds. Settled following discovery. 
• Catheter Flushing LLC v. AngioDynamics et al. (D. UT.): Represented defendant Becton, Dickinson in a multiparty patent litigation involving catheters. Settled following Becton’s assertion of laches and non-infringement defenses.
  

Some of the above matters were handled prior to joining Sidley.

• Co-chair, CPR's Healthcare and Life Sciences Alliance (2025-2026) 
• Member, New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA)
• Co-chair, NYIPLA Women in IP Law (2011–2015)
• Member, Sidley’s Inclusion Committee