Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) dismisses appeal on finding of inducement: Apotex Inc v Janssen Inc, 2023 FCA 220 - Apotex appealed the trial decision, finding that Apo-Macitentan would infringe Canadian Patent No. 2,659,770...more
The Federal Circuit has ruled that claim preclusion doesn’t apply to allegations of induced infringement based on an earlier finding of direct infringement. The patent at issue, US Patent No. 8,206,987 titled...more
As previously reported, the Federal Court (FC) found that Teva would directly infringe but not induce infringement of certain claims of Canadian Patent No. 2,655,335 (335 patent) regarding its paliperidone palmitate product...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s findings of invalidity and noninfringement in a Hatch-Waxman case involving two sets of method patents directed to modulating dosages of pirfenidone, a...more
On April 7, 2022, the Federal Court issued its judgment and reasons in Angelcare Canada Inc et al v Munchkin Inc et al (2022 FC 507), finding that Munchkin, Inc and Munchkin Baby Canada Ltd (the “Defendants” or “Munchkin”)...more
U.S. patent law grants patent owners the right to grant licenses to their patents in analogy to landlords granting rents to real property as a license to use without obtaining ownership. 35 U.S.C. §§ 261-262. But the...more
ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION v. MESO SCALE DIAGNOSTICS, LLC - Before Newman, Prost, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A finding of inducing infringement requires...more
In Lubby Holdings LLC v. Chung, the Federal Circuit held corporate officers and employees who actively assist with their corporation’s infringement may be personally liable for inducing infringement even without any piercing...more
The Federal Court released a pair of decisions in patent litigation relating to paliperidone palmitate (Janssen’s INVEGA SUSTENNA): Janssen Inc v Pharmascience, 2022 FC 62 and Janssen Inc v Apotex, 2022 FC 107. Pharmascience...more
No Assembly, No Infringement – Federal Circuit Declines to Expand the “Final Assembler” Theory of Direct Infringement In Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Appeal No. 20-1700 the Federal Circuit held that...more
In deciding whether the district court correctly interpreted various claim terms in four patents related to communication techniques used in computer gaming technology, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found...more
ACCELERATION BAY LLC v. TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE - Before Moore, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The “final assembler” theory of direct...more
Examining whether portfolio patent licenses can be sufficiently comparable to a single-patent license for the purposes of supporting a patent damages verdict, a split panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more
OMEGA PATENTS, LLC v. CALAMP CORPORATION - Before Prost, Dyk, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Summary: Licensing policies that allow use of any or all of a...more
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Express Mobile, Inc. v. Squarespace, Inc., Civil Action No. 20-1163-RGA (D.Del. August 25, 2021), the Court, inter alia, denied Defendant’s motion to...more
In the latest UK medical technology (Medtech) patent decision Insulet v Roche Diabetes Care [2021] EWHC 1933 (Pat), Ms Pat Treacy (sitting as a judge of the High Court) held that (i) Roche Diabetes Care’s Accu-Chek Solo...more
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, Appeal Nos. 2020-1475, -1605 (Fed. Cir. May 28, 2021)- In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit considered an appeal from the International Trade...more
In GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit reinstated a jury's verdict that Teva infringed GSK's patented method of using its Coreg® drug product, even though Teva's product was initially...more
Goodwin’s 337 Quarterly Insider remains the premiere publicly available source for keeping up to date on all meaningful decisions coming out of the Commission. Please find below Goodwin’s insights on the months of April, May,...more
When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approves a new drug, it also approves a package insert of the drug, known as a “product label.” A pharmaceutical company marketing a generic product is required to package their...more
A recent opinion by the ITC reiterates that a violation of Section 337 can be based on infringement of a method claim that occurs after importation of the relevant article(s). Certain Blood Cholesterol Testing Strips and...more
On Wednesday, the Federal Circuit held that infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) does not require a single entity to perform, direct, or control all of the steps of a patented process for infringement liability to arise from...more
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in Boston Scientific Corp. et al. v. Nevro Corp., Civil Action No. 18-0644-CFC (D.Del. November 25, 2019), the Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss with...more
One person's attempt at judicial economy can be another person's impermissible shortcut, and when it arises in the context of a summary judgment motion of noninfringement, it can amount to legal (or at least procedural) error...more
(Updated October 1, 2019) - On July 3, 2019, Eli Lilly was granted leave to amend its pleadings to introduce a new cause of action for direct infringement of claims relating to a new use without including an allegation of...more