Mr. Radice is experienced in complex commercial litigation and has tried cases before courts and juries in many fields and in many federal and state jurisdictions. He has particular expertise in intellectual property, antitrust, securities, products liability, employment and legal ethics. He has argued securities, antitrust and patent appeals in the Second, Seventh and Federal Circuits, and in the United States Supreme Court argued the patent-antitrust case that determined the limits of the patent jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit.

Mr. Radice has been an Officer and Trustee of the Federal Bar Council since 1985, is a member of the First Department Disciplinary Committee, an SDNY mediator, and lectures on Trial Practice, Deposition Skills and Legal Ethics.

He practiced litigation at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison from 1972-78, then at Parker Auspitz Neesemann & Delehanty from 1978-87, before joining Morrison & Foerster in 1987, when the latter two firms merged. At Morrison & Foerster, Mr. Radice served as Managing Partner of the New York office from its 1987 inception to 1991 and was head of the New York Litigation Practice Group from 1994-2000.

• Defended Omron against infringement claims concerning its blood pressure monitoring devices and three patents owned by plaintiff. The case was tried and won on Omron's laches defense.
• Represented Mexinox in a Section 8 antitrust case against Spanish and German producers of specialty steels asserting anticompetitive restrictions on U.S. and international markets. The case settled when defendants bought out plaintiff's operations.
• Represented Hasbro in a copyright preliminary injunction against knockoffs of TRANSFORMERS toys, upheld by Second Circuit on copyright notice issues. Set the preliminary injunction standard for copyright infringement cases.
• Defended the New York Knicks against Patrick Ewing's attempt to break his contract and become a free agent. The Knicks rights to Ewing were upheld after trial before a Special Arbitrator.
• Defended Colt's M-16 patents in a patent-antitrust case, obtained reversal by the Federal and the Seventh Circuits of a summary judgment of invalidity of 12 patents on best mode and enablement grounds; summary judgment disposing of virtually all of the Sherman Act Section 1 and
• Section 2 claims; and a Supreme Court precedent that established the jurisdictional boundaries between the Federal Circuit and the regional circuits for patent antitrust claims.