Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
What is the range of a federal district court’s power to compel a nonparty’s attendance at a hearing? Every practicing litigator knows the answer—“within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly...more
This post continues our summary of substantive orders in patent litigation in the District of Minnesota. This summary includes a motion to compel production of chemical intermediates from an overseas manufacturer in...more
The Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for October 2023 covers three decisions addressing the scope of the work-product and attorney-client privileges, limits on the use of a defendant’s use of its own patents during...more
In Buergofol GmbH v. Omega Liner Company, Inc., 4-22-cv-04112 (DSD Jul. 13, 2023) (Karen E. Schreier), the court granted the defendant’s motion to compel and awarded monetary sanctions after the plaintiff failed to respond at...more
On Tuesday, December 6, Regeneron filed an expedited motion to compel Mylan’s compliance with the protective order in the parties’ BPCIA litigation concerning Mylan’s proposed aflibercept biosimilar of EYLEA. Regeneron...more
This post continues our summary of substantive orders in patent litigation in the District of Minnesota. This summary includes discovery relevant to willfulness findings, stays under the customer suit exception, and...more
Benton Energy Service Co. (BESCO) has lost its appeal seeking to compel arbitration in a drilling patent dispute against Cajun Services Unlimited LLC. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, upholding a decision from the...more
Addressing a district court decision agreeing to transfer ownership of certain US patents, but declining to do likewise for the related foreign patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that US courts...more
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - VIDSTREAM LLC v. TWITTER, INC. [OPINION] (2019-1734, 2019-1735, 11/25/2020) (Newman, O'Malley, Taranto) - Newman, J. Affirming the decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
As though commercial transactions were not already fraught with enough potential pitfalls, a recent decision from the Southern District of New York highlighted yet another risk that could carry significant consequences to...more
Discovery disputes do not normally lead to a stay of litigation. But, in one recent patent infringement case, the parties’ inability to agree on a safe procedure for allowing the plaintiff’s expert to review the defendant’s...more
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in United Access Technologies, LLC v. AT&T Corp. et al., Civil Action No. 11-338-LPS (D.Del. June 12, 2020), the Court denied the motion of Defendants AT&T Corp.,...more
What happens when your competitors infringe your patent for golf equipment – then declare bankruptcy to avoid paying up? In this episode, Harris Beach intellectual property (IP) attorneys share the story behind the $12...more
In a series of IPR proceedings between Petitioner Adobe Inc. and Patent Owner RAH Color Technologies LLC, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board declined to extend attorney work product protection to deposition questions seeking...more
In inter partes review (IPR) proceedings of patents relating to printer technology, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) granted Patent Owner’s motion to compel testimony over Petitioner’s arguments that the information...more
The many discovery disputes between AbbVie and Boehringer Ingelheim (“BI”) over BI’s biosimilar of HUMIRA® (adalimumab) in the Delaware District Court are providing insight on the bounds of discovery in Biologics Price...more
On Monday, Magistrate Judge Lloret, who is visiting the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, granted Boehringer Ingelheims’s (“BI’s”) motion to compel discovery relating...more
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in TC Technology LLC v. Sprint Corp. et al., Civil Action 16-153-RGA (D.Del. December 13, 2018), the Court granted-in-part and denied-in-part defendants’ motion...more
The PTAB has discretion to permit “routine discovery” under 37 C.F.R. §42.51(b)(1)(iii) when that discovery “is narrowly directed to specific information known to the responding party to be inconsistent with a position...more
IN THIS ISSUE: - Shire’s VYVANSE patent valid, prohibition order issued - First judicial consideration of Vanessa’s Law: Health Canada must disclose requested clinical trial data - PMPRB News - Patented Medicine...more
In a recent order, Administrative Law Judge Lord denied Respondents CSL Behring LLC, CSL Behring GMBH, and CSL Behring Recombinant Facility AG (“CSL Behring”) motion to compel discovery from Complainants Bioverativ Inc.,...more
This post is part of a monthly series summarizing notable activity in patent litigation in the District of Massachusetts, including short summaries of substantive orders issued in pending cases. Ethicon sued Covidien...more
Federal Circuit Denies En Banc Rehearing in Mentor Graphics v. EVE-USA - In Mentor Graphics Corp. v. Eve-USA, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2015-1470, 2015-1554, 2015-1556, the Federal Circuit denied Synopsys’ and EVE’s petition for...more
Jang v. Boston Scientific Corporation (No. 2016-1575, 9/29/17) (Prost, O'Malley, Chen) - Chen, J. Affirming denial of motion for JMOL, vacatur of verdict of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, and judgment of...more