News & Analysis as of

Expert Testimony Appeals

Case Law Suggests Use Of Expert Opinion For Determining IPR Estoppel Of Grounds That Petitioner "Reasonably Could Have Raised"

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e), a final written decision in an inter partes review (“IPR”) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) results in estoppel of certain actions by the petitioner. Specifically, under 35 U.S.C. §...more

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB for Refusing to Allow Supplementation of Record to Add Later Inconsistent Deposition Testimony from...

The Board exercises substantial power over the scope of the record in IPRs, but the Federal Circuit’s decision in Ultratec v. CaptionCall illustrates a limit on that power. The case involved a collection of consolidated IPR...more

Healthcare Law Update: September 2017

by Holland & Knight LLP on

OIG Advisory Opinions - Manufacturer's Free Replacement of Spoiled Pharmaceutical Products Authorized - On Aug. 25, 2017, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG)...more

Board Was Mixed Up Over Blender Patent

In Homeland Housewares, LLC v. Whirlpool Corp., [2016-1511] (August 4, 2017), the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination that Whirlpool’s U.S. Patent No. 7,581,688 relating to a household blender was not...more

Your Hearsay Objection to Expert Testimony in Support of an Award for Future Damages: Use it or Lose it

In David v. Hernandez, 2017 No. B270133, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, upheld the trial court’s evidentiary rulings on two distinct expert opinions: (1) speculative testimony regarding plaintiff’s marijuana...more

Expert Testimony Regarding Positive Marijuana Tests May Not be Admissible in Motor Vehicle Accident Litigation

by Selman Breitman LLP on

As states trend towards legalizing recreational use of marijuana—recreational marijuana use is legal in Alaska, California, Colorado, D.C., Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington—the need for a reliable test for...more

Court of Special Appeals Affirms Admission of Plaintiff’s Medical Records into Evidence to Support Opinions of Defense Expert

by Miles & Stockbridge P.C. on

A recent holding of the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland is of significance to companies defending personal injury lawsuits—particularly those where the nature or extent of a plaintiff’s alleged injuries is in dispute. In...more

CAFC: What a Person of Skill in the Art “Could” Do is Insufficient Evidence to Support Obviousness Finding

Duke University owns US 7,056,712 (‘712), which claims methods of treating a metabolic disorder known as Pompe disease. In particular, ‘712 claims methods of treating Pompe disease using a recombinant human acid...more

Federal Circuit Holds That the PTAB May Consider Legal Conclusions of Obviousness by Expert Witnesses That Are Supported by...

by Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit held that the PTAB may consider legal conclusions of obviousness by experts, but the expert papers must make adequate factual findings and provide a satisfactory explanation as to determinations of...more

Butler Quarterly - Winter 2017

Two recent federal cases highlight the challenges practitioners face in presenting expert claims handling testimony in bad faith litigation under the Daubert standard. In the first case, a court excluded such expert testimony...more

All About the Experts: Rebutting the Parsons Presumption

The Thornton decision is guided by the Parsons presumption, which holds that when additional medical treatment for a compensable injury is required, a rebuttable presumption arises in favor of the claimant that the treatment...more

Inherent Anticipation for Biotechnology Inventions

by Knobbe Martens on

Anticipation by inherent disclosure requires that a single prior art reference necessarily includes the unstated limitation. The unpredictable nature of biological processes means that winning summary judgment of invalidity...more

Florida Appellate Court Reverses Verdict Against Valve Manufacturer in Asbestos Case - Decision: Trial Court Abused Discretion in...

by Holland & Knight LLP on

Manufacturers of products that contained chrysotile asbestos won a major victory in Crane Co. v. DeLisle on Sept. 14, 2016, when Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal (Fourth DCA) reversed a verdict entered against a...more

Federal Circuit Emphasizes that an Obviousness Analysis Based on Common Sense Must be Supported by Substantial Evidence and...

A recent decision by the Federal Circuit suggests that relying on “common sense” in analyzing whether a patent is obvious in view of prior art cannot always be based on common sense alone. In a decision providing...more

Defective products liability: new clarifications on the regime’s implementation

by Reed Smith on

In a ruling handed down on 25 February 2016, the Court of Cassation clarified the conditions for implementation of the defective products liability regime. In this case, a patient was prescribed Mediator treatment...more

Patent Owner Should Have Left “Good Enough” Alone - Belden Inc. v. Berk-Tek LLC

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing issues of obviousness and procedural issues related to the use of declarations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal...more

Federal Circuit Review | December 2015

by Knobbe Martens on

Expert Testimony Not Always Necessary to Establish Prima Facie Obviousness Case in Inter Partes Review - In Belden Inc. v. Berk-Tek LLC, Appeal Nos. 2014-1575, 2014-1576, on appeal from an IPR, the Federal Circuit...more

Southern District of Illinois Court Denies Motion to Exclude “Every Exposure” Opinion

by Wilson Elser on

On September 21, 2015, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois denied a defendant’s motion in limine to exclude expert testimony in an asbestos case. Judge Staci M. Yandle denied General...more

Failing to Respond in Good Faith to Request for Admissions Can Have Costly Consequences

by Low, Ball & Lynch on

Timothy Grace, et al. v. Levik Mansourian, et al. - Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District (September 15, 2015) - The main purpose of a request for admissions is to eliminate issues by compelling admissions of...more

Recent Florida Decision on the Admissibility of Treating Physician Testimony Based on Hypothetical Facts Which Differ from Those...

by Fowler White Burnett, P.A. on

Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal recently considered when a treating physician may offer testimony based on hypothetical facts different than those presented in a medical malpractice case. In Cantore v. West Boca...more

Appellate Court Notes

by Pullman & Comley, LLC on

Supreme Court Advance Release Opinions: SC19359 - Persels & Associates, LLC v. Banking Commissioner - Noting that it has generally been the policy of the Courts to defer to the Legislature, especially as to the...more

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Reinforces the Standard for Detailed and Complete Expert Disclosures and Clarifies the...

by Wilson Elser on

Massachusetts has made much ado about expert disclosures in recent years, even going so far as to implement the still “newish” Superior Court Rule 30B, which requires experts to sign party disclosures of the facts, opinions...more

CAUTION: Unreasonable Denials of Requests for Admission Can Prove Costly

In Grace v. Mansourian, (filed 8/17/2015, order published 9/15/2015, No. G049590) the Fourth District Court of Appeal held a defendant’s denials of plaintiff’s requests for admission were unjustified given the substantial...more

Michigan Court Finds Expert Testimony Not Necessary to Show Link Between Chemical Exposure and Injury

by Beveridge & Diamond PC on

Issuing an opinion that could lower the bar for proving toxic tort causation, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that direct expert testimony may not be necessary to prove causation in a toxic tort case and that a plaintiff...more

Expert Testimony Not Always a Guarantee for Appellate Review with Deference - Shire Development v. Watson Pharmaceuticals; Teva...

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the impact of expert testimony used during claim construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a case remanded by the U.S. Supreme Court, following its January 5, 2015 decision in Teva...more

45 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2
Cybersecurity

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.