Corey Casey is a registered patent attorney who brings his clinical and technical experience as a Doctor of Pharmacy and Registered Pharmacist to provide a real-world perspective in his practice as a patent attorney and litigator. Corey primarily practices in the areas of Hatch-Waxman and biologics patent litigation, including experience with inter partes review proceedings before the PTAB; patent preparation and prosecution; and IP estate assessment and due diligence.

Corey’s practice is primarily focused on Hatch-Waxman patent infringement cases, representing both brand and generic companies. He has experience working on all aspects of cases, including pre-litigation strategy and opinions, fact and expert discovery, motion practice, trial and appeals. Corey also has experience and has served as counsel on multiple IPR matters at the PTAB, all in the pharmaceutical and medical device spaces. Beyond small-molecule pharmaceuticals, Corey has significant experience with due diligence and assessments of biosimilar products, drawing on his unique combination of technical and legal proficiency.

Corey also assists clients in managing the procurement and enforcement of domestic and international patent and trademark portfolios. He has extensive experience preparing freedom to operate, non-infringement and invalidity opinions for patent matters. He works with clients providing guidance and assistance in navigating the FDA regulatory process for new drug products, both prior to and after approval of the product. In addition, Corey serves as IP due diligence counsel in various M&A and investment transactions, taking a unique approach focused on an objective assessment of the portfolio, and the development of solutions to address any IP issues post-closing.

    Representative pharmaceutical experience includes work with:

    • Small molecules
    • Novel compositions and formulations
    • Drug delivery technologies
    • Biologics and biosimilars

    Representative biotechnology experience includes work with:

    • Antibodies
    • Stem cell media
    • Biomarker and analyte assay systems
    • Cell lines and processes for developing biological products

    Representative chemical experience includes work with:

    • Pesticide formulations
    • Hydrogel and related aqueous carrier technology
    • Compositions and processes related to lithium battery products
    • Ion-sequestering and oxidation-inhibiting compositions
    • Reactors and processes for multi-stage oxidation
    Read More

    Education

    • University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (J.D., 2009)
      • University of Missouri-Kansas City (Pharm.D., 2006)

        Bar Admission

        • Missouri, 2009
        • Kansas, 2010
        • Admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office

        Professional Affiliations

        • American Intellectual Property Law Association
        • Missouri Bar Association
        • Kansas City Metropolitan Bar Association

        Recognition

        • Named a BTI Client Service All-Star, 2025
        • Named one of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America in Litigation - Patent, 2025
        • Selected for inclusion in the IAM Patent 1000 list of the World's Leading Patent Practitioners, 2022-2026, Missouri - Recommended
        • Selected for inclusion in the Missouri Lawyers Weekly Up & Coming Awards, 2019
        Publications
        How Skinny is Skinny Enough? Takeaways from the SCOTUS Oral Argument in the Amarin/Hikma Case
        Key Takeaways The U.S. Supreme Court did not seem inclined to create a new rule for induced infringement for pharmaceuticals. Although it’s always difficult to predict the outcome based on oral argument, the questions from the Justices (and the responses from the parties) suggested that a new standard for induced infringement is unlikely to be adopted. SCOTUS appears interested in ruling on the merits. The questioning relating to inducement standards suggests that SCOTUS may be interested in weighing in on the patent merits surrounding skinny labeling. That being said, given that the case was decided on a motion to dismiss, at least one or two questions suggested that it’s possible that SCOTUS will punt on the issue and instead focus on the plausibility standard
        Read More
        Supreme Court Grants Cert. Petition in Hikma / Amarin Skinny Labeling Case
        Key Takeaways Supreme Court to decide if “generic version” marketing can support induced infringement claims. On Jan. 16, 2026, the Court granted Hikma’s petition for cert. in a closely watched case that could redefine the limits of skinny labeling and induced infringement law for generic drugs and biosimilars. Federal Circuit ruling puts skinny labeling strategy in the spotlight. By reviving Amarin’s induced infringement claims despite Hikma’s carved-out label, the appellate court raised new questions about the viability of long-standing generic and biosimilar defenses. Pharma and biosimilar companies should reassess labeling and marketing strategies. Companies are encouraged to join our Feb. 11, 2026, webinar, What’s the Skinny on Skinny Labeling?, for a deeper dive into what’s at stake and how to prepare. In what is
        Read More