×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Keller and Heckman LLPPartner
Michael T. Novak
Pro

Michael T. Novak

Not yet reviewed

1001 G Street NW, Suite 500 West, Washington, DC 20001

Advertising and Promotion, Biotechnology, Californias Proposition 65 and 15 more

About Michael T. Novak

Michael (Mike) Novak practices environmental and business law for chemical manufacturers and other clients, including agricultural, antimicrobial, and biochemical pesticide producers. His practice focuses on the regulation of pesticides and other chemicals under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA); the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA); and other federal and state regulatory programs.

Mike has extensive knowledge and experience in issues associated with product registration, including the registration of biochemicals and unique technologies; petitions to cancel or deny registration; data compensation matters; adverse effects reporting; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enforcement; import and export requirements; tolerance petitions, including the approval of inert ingredients; and the treated-article exemption. He drafts and negotiates business contracts for clients, including distributorship, supply, sub-registration (licensing), and registration/data transfer agreements. Further, Mike has experience advising clients on advertising claims and strategies compliant with FIFRA and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act.

As lead counsel, Mike has successfully obtained settlement of enforcement actions brought by the EPA Headquarters (Washington, DC) and many of the EPA regional offices, as well as the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and the New York Department of Environmental Conservation. He has also obtained resolution of numerous Stop Sale Use and Removal Orders issued by EPA against clients alleging the unlawful sale of a pesticide under FIFRA.

Before entering private practice, Mike served as General Counsel for Riverdale Chemical Company and as Director of Regulatory Affairs for the Chemical Producers and Distributors Association (CPDA).

Insights & In the News

Antifouling Coatings in Murky Waters: How EPA’s VIDA Regulations Leave Industry Uncertain

03.03.2026
Publication

COMMENTARY: California OEHHA and EPA's Prop. 65/FIFRA Skirmish-The Latest in a 30 Year Di...

08.23.2019
Publication

California DPR to Develop Comprehensive Reports to Justify Pesticide Product Registration...

03.07.2019

Best Law Firms Features Keller and Heckman in 2026 Edition

Press Release
11.06.2025

 

Michael T. Novak (Washington, District of Columbia) View website

Reviews for Michael T.

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Technology and Science 1
    • Biotechnology
  • Other 17
    • Advertising and Promotion
    • Californias Proposition 65
    • Cannabis, Hemp, and Cannabinoids (CBD)
    • Chemical Control
    • Environmental
    • Nanotechnology
    • Pesticides
    • REACH
    • TSCA
    • Chemicals and Plastics
    • Consumer Products and Retail
    • Digital Media, Technology, and Telecommunications
    • Energy, Infrastructure, and Transportation
    • Food & Life Sciences
    • Packaging
    • Tobacco and E-Vapor
    • Trade Associations

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Partner
    Firm Name
    Keller and Heckman LLP
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Representative Matters: Successfully defended a treated article seller
    manufacturer before the Federal Trade Commission for alleged misleading claims under the FTC Act
    Reached favorable settlement of several enforcement cases brought by CA DPR for the alleged sale of fertilizers as unregistered plant growth regulators
    Obtained the first FIFRA section 18 emergency exemption for a new active ingredient approved to provide residual control of SARS-Co-V2 in Delta Airline planes, terminals,
    kiosks
    Successfully petitioned EPA to revise its guidance on minimum risk pesticides to clarify that residential use products used in or around food do not require a tolerance or tolerance exemption under the FFDCA. See Need for Tolerances
    Tolerance Exemptions for Minimum Risk Pesticides
    US EPA
    Advocated before a mediator to successfully persuade EPA HQ to dismiss a complaint seeking to levy a penalty of $65,000 for a hospital disinfectant alleged not to be efficacious under EPA's Antimicrobial Testing Program (ATP)
    Successfully persuaded EPA HQ to dismiss complaints in two separate matters alleging violations of EPA's Good Laboratory Practices St
    ard (GLP)
    Submitted comments in response to EPA's Human Studies Rule to obtain exclusion of combination sunscreens
    insect repellents

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    1998, North Carolina
    2001, District of Columbia
    1988, Illinois
    Memberships

    Memberships

    •American Bar Association

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    University of South Carolina School of Law
    Class of 1992
    J.D.
    Other Education
    University of North Carolina
    Class of 1989
    B.A.

Activity

Legal Community Contributions

Email Michael T. Novak

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message:
Return to Profile Reset Form

Attorneys FAQs

  • What year was this attorney first admitted to the bar?
    Michael T. Novak was admitted in 1988 to the State of Illinois.
  • Is this attorney admitted to the bar in more than one state?
    Yes, Michael T. Novak is admitted to practice in District of Columbia, Illinois and North Carolina.
  • How many attorneys are in this law firm?
    Keller and Heckman LLP has 80 attorneys at this location.
  • What law school did this attorney attend?
    Michael T. Novak attended University of South Carolina School of Law.
  • What year was this attorney's law firm established?
    Keller and Heckman LLP was established in 1962.

Attorney information displayed in this FAQ section is based upon information the lawyer has included on their profile, in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals.

These FAQs include information about a lawyer's background, but do not evaluate their knowledge of the law, past performance on individual cases, personality, or communication skills.

It is solely the responsibility of lawyers and law firms to ensure that any information they provide complies with all applicable laws and rules of professional conduct.

You should be aware that the information we rely upon may not be comprehensive, or frequently updated.

Always research the lawyer further to get a better understanding of their license credentials, disciplinary status, background, and experience.

Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions