Photo of Baldassare Vinti

Baldassare Vinti

Subscribe to Baldassare Vinti's Posts

Baldassare (“Baldo”) Vinti is the head of Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group.

Baldo is a first-chair trial lawyer known for navigating complex, bet-the-company intellectual property disputes across industry verticals and next-generation technologies. With over 25 years of experience, Baldo represents leading global companies and universities in patent, trade secret, false advertising, consumer class actions and technology-related breach of contract litigation in federal and state courts as well as before the International Trade Commission.

Baldo is particularly sought after for his courtroom skill and strategic depth, having led trials, arbitrations and appeals in high-stakes disputes involving technologies ranging from pharmaceuticals and medical devices to encryption, digital media, diagnostics, mobile platforms and software. Baldo has represented global corporations, including Arkema S.A., British Telecommunications PLC, Church & Dwight Co., Inc., Henry Schein, Inc., Maidenform Brands Inc., Mitsubishi Electric Corp., Ossur North America Inc., Panasonic Corp., Sony Corp., Welch Foods, Inc. and Zenith Electronics LLC.

With a background in pharmacy, Baldo brings deep domain expertise to pharmaceutical litigation. He has a proven record of driving successful outcomes in complex pharmaceutical milestone payment, royalty and licensing disputes—often stemming from collaboration agreements, co-development deals, and M&A transactions—where the financial and strategic stakes run high.

In addition to representing corporate clients, Baldo works closely with university innovation and technology transfer offices to maximize the financial return of research investments. He develops tailored IP asset optimization strategies and aggressively enforces intellectual property rights to protect and monetize core innovations—whether through high-value licensing agreements, shaping and advancing spin-out company development, or successful litigation.

Baldo also provides strategic counsel on IP due diligence, complex licensing, IP structuring, patentability and freedom-to-operate analyses, and infringement and validity opinions. He advises boards and executive teams on aligning IP strategy with business objectives, mitigating risk and maximizing the value of innovation assets.

A frequent author and commentator on intellectual property topics, Baldo has been quoted in the National Law Journal, Bloomberg BNA, Law360, Westlaw Journal and Inside Counsel magazine. He is also a regular contributor to articles published in Medical Product Outsourcing magazine that deal with the medical device industry.

Baldo served as a judicial intern for Hon. John E. Sprizzo of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and for Hon. Charles A. LaTorella of the New York Supreme Court.

Contact:Read more about Baldassare Vinti

Key Takeaways:

  • The Ninth Circuit court of appeals reviewed three separate proposed class actions against Papa John’s International Inc., Converse Inc., and Bloomingdale’s, all centered on whether certain website tracking activities violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA).
  • The plaintiffs in these cases alleged that companies unlawfully used technologies like “session replay” software and chatbots to monitor website visitors’ interactions, intercepting their information and transmitting it to third parties without consent, thereby violating CIPA Section 631.
  • The court assessed how CIPA, an older wiretapping law, applies to modern website tracking like session replay and chatbots, focusing on definitions of “interception” and “contents.”

As part of our commitment to keeping you informed of new regulatory developments and their potential implications, we have highlighted recent statements by federal officials concerning loyalty programs, such as those involving airline miles and credit card points. These comments signal a potential shift in how these programs are viewed under consumer protection laws, and the plaintiffs’ bar is likely to take notice.