Michael J. Kasdan concentrates his practice on intellectual property litigation and on patent law. He has a technical  background in electrical engineering and had a prior career as a technology consultant. His law practice focuses on a broad range of technologies ranging from consumer electronics to computer architecture and networks to semiconductor chips to wireless devices to medical products and devices.

Mr. Kasdan has experience handling all aspects of patent litigations and disputes before district courts, the Federal Circuit, and the International Trade Commission, as well as in private licensing negotiations, in arbitrations, and in mediations. He also counsels clients on strategic patent prosecution, portfolio development, and provides opinions and analyses on issues including patent infringement, validity, and enforceability.

After graduating magna cum laude from NYU School of Law, Mr. Kasdan worked as law clerk to the Honorable Judge Roderick R. McKelvie in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Prior to joining Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP in the Fall of 2004, he was an associate in the intellectual property department of Kirkland & Ellis LLP.

During 2008-2009, Mr. Kasdan was seconded from our firm and joined Panasonic Corporation in Japan, where he worked as in-house patent counsel in Panasonic's licensing center. In this role, he provided a diverse range of legal counseling. Mr. Kasdan acted as lead counsel representing Panasonic in addressing numerous third party patent assertions and license negotiations and developing substantive defensive positions. He also provided legal advice and opinions across a broad set of technology areas and in many facets of patent law. Mr. Kasdan also negotiated and drafted complex agreements, including portfolio cross-license agreements, and provided legal advice concerning the interpretation of such agreements.

Mr. Kasdan has spoken and written articles on various areas of intellectual property law, including licensing practices, defending against patent infringement cases, the doctrine of patent exhaustion, willful infringement, patent misuse and standards estoppel, damages and patent valuation, inequitable conduct, and business methods patents.

Mr. Kasdan attended the University of Pennsylvania where he graduated magna cum laude with a degree in electrical engineering with a minor in mathematics. He attended New York University School of Law where he was the Notes Editor for the NYU Law Review, President of the Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law Society and a member of the Order of the Coif.

He is admitted to practice before all New York State courts, the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Published Works

• "The Impact Of American Needle On IP And Contracts" IP Law360, May 26, 2010
• "Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP Patent Law Alert: Supreme Court to Decide Whether Foreign Sale Exhausts Copyrights"
  April 23, 2010
• "The 2nd Circ. Stance On Tiffany V. EBay" IP Law360, April 6, 2010
• Implications of Reed Elsevier v. Muchnick
  - IP Law360, March 17, 2010
• "Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP Patent Law Alert: Developments in the Law of Inducement and Direct Infringement", March 8, 2010
• "SEB v. Montgomery Ward: Extending the Reach of U.S. Patent Laws to Foreign Defendants-Developments in the Law of Direct Infringement and Inducement", March 5, 2010
• "Federal Courts Closely Scrutinizing and Slashing Patent Damage Awards", 2010 Patently-O Patent Law Journal 24, March 3, 2010
• "Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP Patent Litigation Alert:
  U.S. Government Files Brief In Bilski V. Kappos" September 28, 2009
• “Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP Patent Law Alert: Prometheus Labs v. Mayo Clinic: Federal Circuit Applies Transformation Prong of In Re Bilski Test and Finds Drug Dosage Method Claim to be Patentable Subject Matter Under Section 101”, September 17, 2009
• Will The High Court Clarify The Exhaustion Doctrine?
  - IP Law360, January 16, 2008
• Reviving The Exhaustion Doctrine
  - IP Law360, January 10, 2008
• Quanta Computer v. LG Electronics:
  Will The Supreme Court Revive The Exhaustion Doctrine?
  - Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein, LLP, January, 2008
• Infringement Assertions In The New World Order
  - IP Law360, October 17, 2007, Guest Column
• "In re Seagate Technology: Willfulness and Waiver, a Summary and a Proposal," 2007 Patently-O Patent Law Journal 1, May 14, 2007
• "Reining In U.S. Patent Law For Software," Portfolio Media, May 7, 2007
• "KSR v. Teleflex, Redefining The Obvious," Portfolio Media, May 3, 2007
• "How Courts Should Do Their Business Regarding Business Methods," NY State Bar Association Journal: "Bright Ideas," Vol. 9, No. 3, 2000

Speaking Engagements

• Intellectual Property Seminar - (i) The Federal Circuit's en banc decision in Ariad v. Lilly: Implications for Patent Litigation and Patent Prosecution; and (ii) Marking: Why to Mark, When to Mark, How to Mark, and the Dangers of False Marking, Kyoto, Japan, May 11, 2010
• NYU School of Law - 2010 Trade Regulation Brown Bag Lunch Series: Practicing IP Law In A Global Economy, New York, NY, March 24, 2010
• InSITE Alumni Advising Session, New York, NY, February. 25, 2010