Find An Attorney
Asim Varma
Partner
Washington, DC
tel: +1 202.942.5180
fax: +1 202.942.5999

Asim.Varma@aporter.com
Download vCard

Practice Focus

Asim Varma is a partner in the litigation and antitrust practice groups. She focuses on civil litigation and government investigations raising significant antitrust and intellectual property issues affecting clients in pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and high technology industries.

Representative Matters

  • Roche Molecular Systems and Hoffmann La Roche Inc.: Lead counsel on a number of antitrust matters defending the validity and licensing of patents included in Roche's polymerase chain reaction (PCR) patent portfolio.
    • Counsel for Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. and Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc. in U.S. ex rel. Promega v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc., et al., a qui tam case in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Case dismissed with prejudice in September 2004.
    • Counsel for Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. in Applera Corp. and Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. v. MJ Research, Inc. defended against numerous antitrust counterclaims in patent infringement litigation brought in the District of Connecticut including unlawful tying, price fixing, misuse, package licensing, and monopolization.
  • Wyeth (formerly American Home Products) counsel for Wyeth in class actions challenging managed care rebate contracts as unlawful exclusive dealing and monopolization. See J.B.D.L. Corp. v. Wyeth-Ayerst Labs., Inc., No. 1:01-CV-704, 1:03-CV-781, 2005 WL 1396940 at *16 (S.D.Ohio, June 13, 2005) (granting summary judgment for the defendant), appeal pending before Sixth Circuit.
  • Philip Morris USA: defended Philip Morris in exclusive dealing case challenging retail distribution and incentive program. See R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Philip Morris Inc., 199 F. Supp. 2d 362 (M.D.N.C. 2002), aff'd per curiam, 67 Fed. Appx. 810 (4th Cir. 2003) (granting summary judgment for defendant in antitrust challenge to promotional payments in exchange for near exclusive shelf space allocations).
  • Xerox Corporation: defended Xerox in precedent-setting litigation concerning the right of patent and copyright owners to refuse to license to competitors.See In re Independent Service Organizations Antitrust Litigation, 203 F.3d 1322, (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied 121 S.Ct. 1077 (2001).

Representative Matters

  • Roche Molecular Systems and Hoffmann La Roche Inc.: Lead counsel on a number of antitrust matters defending the validity and licensing of patents included in Roche's polymerase chain reaction (PCR) patent portfolio.
    • Counsel for Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. and Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc. in U.S. ex rel. Promega v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc., et al., a qui tam case in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Case dismissed with prejudice in September 2004.
    • Counsel for Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. in Applera Corp. and Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. v. MJ Research, Inc. defended against numerous antitrust counterclaims in patent infringement litigation brought in the District of Connecticut including unlawful tying, price fixing, misuse, package licensing, and monopolization.
  • Wyeth (formerly American Home Products) counsel for Wyeth in class actions challenging managed care rebate contracts as unlawful exclusive dealing and monopolization. See J.B.D.L. Corp. v. Wyeth-Ayerst Labs., Inc., No. 1:01-CV-704, 1:03-CV-781, 2005 WL 1396940 at *16 (S.D.Ohio, June 13, 2005) (granting summary judgment for the defendant), appeal pending before Sixth Circuit.
  • Philip Morris USA: defended Philip Morris in exclusive dealing case challenging retail distribution and incentive program. See R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Philip Morris Inc., 199 F. Supp. 2d 362 (M.D.N.C. 2002), aff'd per curiam, 67 Fed. Appx. 810 (4th Cir. 2003) (granting summary judgment for defendant in antitrust challenge to promotional payments in exchange for near exclusive shelf space allocations).
  • Xerox Corporation: defended Xerox in precedent-setting litigation concerning the right of patent and copyright owners to refuse to license to competitors. See In re Independent Service Organizations Antitrust Litigation, 203 F.3d 1322, (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied 121 S.Ct. 1077 (2001).

Articles

Presentations

Advisories

Events

Education
JD, Harvard Law School, 1988
BS in Applied Mathematics, University of Michigan, 1985
Admissions
District of Columbia
Massachusetts