Science, Computers & Technology Intellectual Property Civil Procedure

Read Science, Computers & Technology updates, news, alerts, and legal analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Par Pharm., Inc.

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The one asserted claim in the ’031 patent, claim 7, depends from non-asserted independent claim 1. Claim 7 narrows claim 1 by limiting it to a specific delivery method and requires...more

Myriad’s Continuing Patent Debate

On October 6, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit entertained oral argument in the interlocutory appeal of the district court’s denial of Myriad’s motion for preliminary injunction against Ambry Genetics....more

Supreme Court: Should Appeal Give Deference to Lower Courts on Claim Construction?

On October 15, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. v. Sandoz Inc., et al., case number 13-854. At issue is the level of deference that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

Court Report - October 2014 #3

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Tris Pharma Inc. v. Actavis Laboratories FL Inc. et al. 1:14-cv-01309; filed October 15, 2014 in the District Court of...more

Hospira, Inc. v. Burwell

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Precedex is commonly used as a sedative. Specifically, the FDA has approved Precedex for two uses: (i) sedation of initially intubated and mechanically ventilated patients during...more

Apotex Inc. v. UCB, Inc.

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Apotex appealed the district court’s finding that the ’556 patent was unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. The ’556 patent describes a method for making moexipril tablets used...more

First Final CBM Decision Invalidates Patent Under § 101

U.S. Bancorp v. Retirement Capital Access Management Co. - In the first final written decision issued in a Covered Business Method (CBM) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB, the Board) ruled that it has...more

The PTAB finds that the petitioner did not show that a patent claiming internet-based transactions is not a technological...

In GSI Commerce Solutions, Inc. v. Lakshmi Arunachalam, GSI filed a petition seeking covered business method patent review of U.S. Patent No. 8,346,894 relating to "facilat[ing] real-time two-way transactions, as opposed to...more

Sherry Knowles Addresses Real World Impact of Myriad-Mayo Guidance at BIO Symposium

Last month, at the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) IP & Diagnostics Symposium in Alexandria, VA, Sherry Knowles of Knowles IP Strategies addressed the impact of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Myriad-Mayo...more

Amicus briefs shape intellectual property law

Amicus briefs have become an established part of sophisticated litigation strategy - As the value of intellectual property rights has skyrocketed, the law governing ownership and enforcement of those rights has grown...more

Ferring B.V. v. Watson Labs., Inc.—Florida II

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The patents-in-suit claim oral dosage forms and method of treating menorrhagia and require three elements: (i) about 650 mg of tranexamic acid; (ii) a so-called modified release...more

Teva v. Sandoz -- Is Deferential Review a Boon for Patent Trolls?

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. case to determine whether appellate courts should afford any deference to a trial court's claim construction...more

Appealing Medical Device Patent Cases

Medical device patent infringement cases, like all patent infringement cases, must be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. People often refer to this Court as the “Federal...more

Motion to Strike Expert Testimony Denied Even Though Expert Had Never Used Product and Examined Only Selected Pieces of Source...

In this patent infringement action, the defendant moved to exclude portions of the plaintiff's (Dr. Bambos') expert testimony. Defendant argued that Dr. Bambos lacks familiarity with the infringing products, relied too...more

Supreme Court’s Footnote About Auckerman in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. Does Not Create New Law: Cordis’s Laches Defense...

Medinol Ltd., v. Cordis Corporation and Johnson & Johnson Case Number: 1:13-cv-0148-SAS In March, Judge Scheindlin found that laches formed a complete defense for Cordis in this matter. Medinol did not appeal...more

Court Report - October 2014 #2

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. 1:14-cv-00167; filed October 7, 2014 in the...more

Terms Construed in Website Messaging Patent/Summary Judgment Denied In Light of New Construction/Testimony Excluded

523 IP LLC, v. CureMD.com - Case Number: 1:11-cv-09697-KPF - Judge Failla construed terms of U.S. Patent No. 7,702,523 (“Website messaging system”), and, as her construction at times differs significantly from...more

IP Newsflash - October 2014 #2

Patents to a “Specific Technological Process” Fall on the Pleadings as Abstract Ideas - On September 22, 2014, Judge George H. Wu (C.D. Cal.) ruled on the pleadings that two Planet Blue patents relating to “the idea of...more

Claim Construction Clarified, Not Changed, Post-Verdict

Mformation Technologies v. Research In Motion - Addressing whether a district court’s post-verdict ruling on judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) constituted an improper change in claim construction, the U.S. Court of...more

Court Denies Motion to Compel Deposition Testimony on Overly Broad 30(b)(6) Topics and on "Contention" Topics

In this patent infringement action brought by Trustees of Boston University ("BU"), BU alleged that defendants infringed U.S. Patent No. 5,686,738 (the "'738 Patent"), which centers on light emitting diodes ("LEDs") and the...more

To Stay or Not to Stay…

The Federal Circuit recently decided its second case on the issue of staying a district court patent infringement litigation pending Covered Business Method (CBM) review. In Benefit Funding Systems v. Advance America Cash,...more

Teva v. Sandoz Puts Patent Claim Construction in the Spotlight—Again

On October 15, 2014, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. The case involves claims regarding generic versions of Teva’s multiple sclerosis drug, Copaxone®. The...more

Judge Preska Finds a Design—Although Developed Using Test Equipment—To Be Ornamental

In this dispute concerning U.S. Patent No. D618,132 (“Diamond jewellery (sic)”), Judge Preska denied declaratory judgment plaintiff’s request for summary judgment of patent invalidity and non-infringement, but granted the...more

PTAB Denies Petition for Inter Partes Review When Ongoing Proceedings Raise Substantially Similar Arguments

In July 2013, Cardiocom filed a petition for IPR of a patent. Petitioner Medtronic then acquired Cardiocom. In January 2014, the Board decided to move forward on eight claims and declared trial on two obviousness grounds,...more

PTAB Denies Petition for Inter Partes Review Remedying "Noted Deficiency" in Previously Denied Petition

Petitioner Metronic had previously filed two other petitions for IPR of a patent. The Board instituted trial on one of the petitions and denied the other. Medtronic then filed a third petition for IPR of the patent that...more

1,437 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 58

Follow Science, Computers & Technology Updates on: