4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that the asserted patents were not unenforceable for inequitable conduct, determining that statements made by counsel to the US Patent &...more
Kilpatrick’s Alton Absher and Andie Anderson recently presented “Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation” at the firm’s annual 2024 Advanced Patent Law Seminar. This full-day seminar featured discussions...more
The Patent Trial & Appeal Board of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) canceled all challenged claims across five patents because the patent owner failed to meet its duty of candor by selectively and improperly withholding...more
Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal No. 2021-1981 (Fed. Cir. May 9, 2023) In our Case of the Week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit considered the “analogous art” inquiry in...more
Relying heavily on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s denial of an inter partes review (IPR) petition involving the patent-in-suit, a court in the Eastern District of Virginia recently refused to let the defendant amend its...more
Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Case No. 17-cv-00072-BLF (N.D. Cal. Sept. 13, 2018), reminds us that representations to the PTAB can have consequences in district court litigation, even outside the estoppel context. ...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Click-to-Call Technologies, LP v. Ingenio, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1242 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2018) In an appeal of an inter partes review, the Federal Circuit reviewed for the first time the...more
Below is an update on recent developments in several litigations involving biosimilar products. Amgen v. Sandoz (filgrastim, pegfilgrastim): As we previously reported, the district court granted summary judgment of...more
Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more
In Regeneron v. Merus, a divided panel affirms a determination of unenforceability for violation of the duty of disclosure. What is interesting about the case is that neither the district court nor the majority reviewed...more
This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. ...more
Update to TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, Case No. 16-341 (May 22, 2017) - In an 8-0 opinion written by Justice Thomas (Justice Gorsuch did not participate), the Supreme Court rules that a defendant...more
In a recent decision in UV Curable Coatings for Optical Fibers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1031, Judge MaryJoan McNamara struck a respondent’s inequitable conduct defense, which the respondent based on the complainants’ conduct during...more
Federal Circuit Affirms Inequitable Conduct Based On “Intentionally Selective” Disclosure - On September 26, 2014, a divided Federal Circuit panel affirmed the unenforceability of three American Calcar patents,...more