AI in the Operating Room: Liability Issues for Device Makers — The Good Bot Podcast
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 201: SHL Medical’s Investment in the Carolinas with Kimberlee Steele of SHL Medical
The FDA's Response to AI Medical Innovation — The Good Bot Podcast
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
FDA Releases Laboratory-Developed Tests Final Rule – Thought Leaders in Health Law
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 177: Brain Health and Research with Dr. Fridriksson, Neuroscientist, Professor, & Vice President of Research at the Universit
Transparency and the Open Payments Program
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 19
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 18
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 17
Health + Tech - Improving Cancer Care With Digital Health Tools
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 14
Health + Tech - How Digital Health Tools Help Create Greater Consumer Focus in Healthcare
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 11
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 9
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 8
Episode 132: Dr. Ehsan Jabbarzadeh, Co-Founder, Obsidio, and Professor, USC
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 118: Matthew Roberts and Darra Coleman, Health Care Attorneys, Nexsen Pruet
Healthcare Headlines: Episode 8 – Healthcare Lending Deal Landscape Trends and Forecasts for the Future
Healthcare Headlines: Episode 7 — Evolving Landscape of Healthcare Provider & Medical Product Liability
On August 7, 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS” or the “Agency”) issued a final procedural notice (“Notice”) outlining a new Medicare coverage pathway, aimed at achieving timelier and predictable access...more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., has garnered significant attention, especially concerning the application of the “safe harbor” provision under 35 U.S.C. §...more
On December 1, 2023, amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 702 geared toward emphasizing and explaining the responsibility of the judge as a “gatekeeper” for expert testimony took effect. On December 18, 2023, one of...more
Senators Focus Attention on Litigation Funding’s Opacity - Building on the momentum we previously noted related to litigation funding, on September 14, Senator John Kennedy introduced the Protecting Our Courts from Foreign...more
The US Supreme Court rules that, under the Federal False Claims Act (FCA), the knowledge and subjective beliefs of a defendant at the time a false claim was submitted are determinative, and post hoc objectively reasonable...more
Even though they are still quoted, statements in Medtronic v. Lohr, which question whether FDA (Food & Drug Administration) medical device clearance is a judgment about a device’s safety, no longer accurately describe what...more
US and EU Life Sciences Law firms Fieldfisher & Gardner Law recently held a CLE event in Silicon Valley covering Healthcare Compliance, Data Privacy and Regulatory hot topics for MedTech and Pharma companies. Discussion...more
For most of us, we’re stuck in the August heat, on delayed European vacations, or hopefully just hanging out at the beach. But for the Court it still was work as usual, including a return trip to the Federal Circuit for the...more
For sale, or not for sale- That is the question in Larry G. Junker v. Medical Components Inc. et al., case that started in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and which has now been appealed to...more
A medical device patentee has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to save his design patent, related to an introducer sheath handle, from invalidity based on application of the “on-sale” bar, which prohibits patenting an invention...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided a case resolving a patent dispute between two medical device companies, Hologic, Inc. and Minerva Surgical. The opinion was closely watched because it raised the question of whether an...more
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. has drastically limited the doctrine of assignor estoppel, requiring patent practitioners to reconsider assignment and other contractual provisions...more
The doctrine of assignor estoppel bars an inventor who assigns a patent to a third party from later arguing that the assigned patent is invalid. The Supreme Court has now upheld this doctrine but has limited its scope,...more
The Supreme Court clarified the doctrine of assignor estoppel in its June 29th Minerva v. Hologic opinion. In doing so, the Court vacated the Federal Circuit’s opinion estopping Minerva from arguing that Hologic’s patent is...more
On June 29, 2021, the Supreme Court published its divisive opinion in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., Et. Al. The 5-4 decision penned by Justice Kagan upheld the centuries-old doctrine of Assignor Estoppel, while...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 29 decision in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. has important implications for inventors who assign patent rights, employers to whom employees assign patent rights, other assignees, and...more
In a decision reaching all corners of the technology sector, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 29, 2021 held that, when fairness requires, a patent inventor can contest a patent's validity after assigning it to a third party....more
Rooted in the principle of fairness, the doctrine of assignor estoppel generally prevents an inventor, who had previously assigned their patent rights to another for value, from later contesting the validity of the assigned...more
The Supreme Court, speaking through a five-justice majority, has reaffirmed the equitable principle of assignor estoppel while at the same time limiting its application in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. Assignor...more
[co-authors: Patrick Murray, Risa Rahman, and Jae Bandeh] The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return...more
On June 29, 2021, the Supreme Court clarified the “boundaries” of the patent-law doctrine of assignor estoppel in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., 594 U.S. (2021). The Court, in Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. Co. v....more
On June 29, 2021, the Supreme Court limited the doctrine of assignor estoppel that has long prevented inventors from challenging the validity of patents they have assigned to a third party. ...more
On June 29, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. 20-440 (June 29, 2021) (slip opinion). Minerva involves a challenge to the “assignor estoppel” doctrine, which is an...more
The Supreme Court upheld assignor estoppel in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., et al. but held that the Federal Circuit “failed to recognize the doctrine’s proper limits.” In doing so, the Court imposed new...more
MINERVA SURGICAL, INC. v. HOLOGIC, INC., et al. - Supreme Court of the United States. Opinion of the Court written by Justice Kagan. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Barrett filed a dissenting opinion,...more