Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Science, Computers & Technology

Read Intellectual Property Law updates, alerts, news, and legal analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court Calls for Greater Deference to District Court Claim Construction

This week, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court held that the Federal Circuit must apply a deferential “clear error” standard of review to any finding of fact underlying a district court’s...more

Supreme Court Hears Trademark Cases on the Preclusive Effect of TTAB Decisions and the Tacking Doctrine

In its October 2014 term, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in two trademark cases. Both cases have practical significance for trademark litigants because they have the potential to change the way parties approach...more

Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Revises Standard for Appellate Review of Patent Claim Construction Decisions

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court issued a 7-2 decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 13-854, 574 U.S.__ (2015), holding that the Federal Circuit must apply a "clear error" standard when...more

What's Next? Some Consequences of the Teva v. Sandoz Decision

Supreme Court Building #3It has escaped almost no one's notice that the Supreme Court has spent the past decade or so being much more involved in patent law than in preceding twenty years. Evident but perhaps less discussed...more

Patent Claim Construction Now Subject to Hybrid Review

In a 7–2 decision penned by Justice Breyer, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the de novo standard as the sole standard of review of issues arising in claim construction. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz,...more

Supreme Court Clarified Standard of Review for Patent Claim Construction – Subsidiary Factual Findings are to be Reviewed for...

In a recent case, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. Et Al. V. Sandoz, Inc. Et Al., the Supreme Court of the United States clarified that subsidiary issues of fact determined by a District Court during patent claim construction...more

Supreme Court Calls for Some Deference in Claim Construction Standard of Review

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., finding that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure call for some deference in the claim construction standard of...more

Supreme Court ends Fed Circuit’s lone reign over claim construction (some of the time at least)

Just like an older sibling forced to share with a new younger brother or sister, we are all likely familiar with authority stepping in and forcing us to share our previously unchecked power or benefits with others. That’s...more

Intellectual Property Alert: Supreme Court Overturns De Novo Review of Patent Claim Construction

On Tuesday, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court reversed long-standing Federal Circuit precedent under which patent claim construction was reviewed wholly de novo. Specifically, the Court held...more

Federal Circuit Upholds $35 million Infringement Award to KFx Medical

(January 20, 2015) KFx Medical Corp.‘s $35 million patent infringement award against Arthrex, Inc. was upheld by the Federal Circuit. KFx’s lawsuit alleged that Arthrex’s SutureBridge and SpeedBridge devices infringed U.S....more

Supreme Court Endorses De Novo Review of Claim Construction, But Holds that Subsidiary Facts Underlying Claim Construction are...

Background: Patent claim construction findings are a key aspect to patent infringement cases. Previously, the Federal Circuit reviewed the entire claim construction issue, including any subsidiary facts, de novo....more

Patent Owner: Preponderance of Evidence Standard Can Never Be Met Without Expert Testimony

In IPR2013-00357, Patent Owner Overland Storage, Inc. filed a request for rehearing of the final written decision holding that claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 6,328,766 are unpatentable. The basis for the patent owner's...more

Supreme Court Starts 2015 Off with Focus on Facts Shaping Intellectual Property Disputes

The U.S. Supreme Court kicked 2015 off with an intellectual property bang, issuing two important rulings earlier this week. Both decisions focus on the facts underpinning intellectual property disputes—who decides them and...more

In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. And Hana Financial, Inc., The Supreme Court Issues Two IP Decisions – One Deferring To Trial...

This week, the Court rendered two IP opinions in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 13-854 (argued October 15, 2014) and Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank, No. 13-1211 (argued December 3, 2014) . Teva...more

Inter Partes Review Requested for MiMedx Tissue Graft Patent

Tissue Transplant Technology Ltd. and Human Biologics of Texas Ltd. (“the Petitioners”) recently filed a petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board requesting inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,597,687 (“the ’687...more

Supreme Court Rules on “Tacking” and District Court Distinguishes Dish Network from Aereo

Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank – What You Need to Know - Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court held that whether two trademarks may be tacked for purposes of determining priority is a question for the jury, because...more

Cloud Computing: Legal Issues on the Horizon

In the May 2014 issue of the Business Litigation Report, we discussed a hot topic in law and technology: cloud computing. That topic did not cool down over the summer. Businesses and courts—including the Supreme Court—have...more

De Novo Review of Claim Construction No Longer the De Facto Standard

On January 20, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, rejected the de novo review standard applied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit when reviewing all claim construction...more

Supreme Court Rules that the “Clear Error” Standard Applies When Factual Determinations Underlying Claim Construction Are Reviewed...

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, held in Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., that an appellate court must apply a “clear error” standard of review when assessing a trial judge’s resolution of...more

Supreme Court Alters Claim Construction Review Standard in Patent Litigation

The Court creates a hybrid standard of review. On January 20, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court altered the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s longstanding de novo...more

Supreme Court's Dual Standard of Review for Claim Construction Creates a Potential Grab Bag For Patent Litigants

The United States Supreme Court clarified yet another important standard in patent law by mandating that the Federal Circuit apply clear error review when reviewing subsidiary factfindings in patent claim construction. Teva...more

Teva v. Sandoz: The Dissent

The recent history of Supreme Court patent cases has made the dissent a seemingly endangered species, the Court consistently deciding important patent cases by 9-0 votes and, at best, garnering concurring opinions for...more

Can Digital Healthcare Innovation Be Patented? Eligibility of Digital Healthcare Technologies Under the New USPTO Eligibility...

Digital healthcare, the confluence of digital technology with medical and other biological fields, has become an ever-increasing presence in our daily lives. Ideas that seemed nearly impossible just a few years ago (such as...more

U.S. Supreme Court Delivers Important Ruling in Teva v. Sandoz Case

The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has nationwide jurisdiction for patent cases, must give deference to a district court’s factual findings in claim construction...more

Supreme Court Gives District Courts More Power in Patent Claim Construction

On January 20, 2015, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court reallocated power between federal district courts and the Federal Circuit in the patent claim construction process.  For many years,...more

1,752 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 71

Follow Intellectual Property Updates on: