Monumental Win in Data Breach Class Action: A Case Study — The Consumer Finance Podcast
The Only Rule of Multidistrict Litigation Is...
JONES DAY PRESENTS®: The Mechanics of Multidistrict Litigation: Streamlining Complex Cases
Employment Law Now V-106 - BREAKING OSHA ETS NEWS: Extending the Stay and Choosing a Lottery Winner
Gene Grabowski on Pharmaceutical & Medical Devices
On August 26, 2024, Regeneron filed a BPCIA complaint in the District Court for the District of New Jersey against Sandoz Inc. related to Sandoz’s ENVEEZU (aflibercept-abzv)....more
As we previously reported, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation recently granted Regeneron Pharmaceutical’s (“Regeneron”) motion to establish a multi-district litigation (“MDL”) for its aflibercept BPCIA litigation....more
The Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office vacated and remanded a decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board discretionarily denying institution of an inter partes review petition. The Director concluded that...more
As we previously reported, on January 11, 2024, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”) moved to establish a multi-district litigation (“MDL”) for its aflibercept BPCIA litigation, and to transfer its case against...more
This post reviews developments from the Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Texas in December 2023. ...more
In re PersonalWeb Technologies LLC, Appeals Nos. 2021-1858, -1859, -1860 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 3, 2023) In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the question before the...more
ACI’s 8th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Master Symposium returns in person to Chicago on September 21-22! Join leading pharmaceutical patent litigators for brand name and generic drug companies to receive up-to-the-minute...more
Premier forum which shapes the law, policy, and proceedings of Paragraph IV Litigation is back to New York City on April 26-27! Pharmaceutical patent practitioners from across the globe attend this flagship conference to...more
Venue in patent cases has been a topic of recent Supreme Court (TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC) and Federal Circuit (In re Cray) consideration. Last month, the Federal Circuit again considered venue with...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s finding that the patents-in-suit were unenforceable due to inequitable conduct because of a failure to disclose information related to an offer for...more
The patent landscape experienced a paradigm shift with the May 2017 United States Supreme Court decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands. In TC Heartland, venue in patent cases was narrowed to either (1) the...more
This year the District Court for the Western District of Texas is on track to experience almost a 100 percent increase in patent complaints filed compared to 2018. This significant increase is expected to continue into the...more
The Federal Circuit’s ongoing effort to implement TC Heartland—the Supreme Court’s landmark 2017 patent venue decision—took another step forward in May with In re BigCommerce, Inc., which vacated and remanded two decisions...more
In our continuing coverage of the post-TC Heartland landscape, the Federal Circuit recently clarified that venue is proper in only one district per state in In re BigCommerce, Inc., 2018-122 (Fed. Cir. May 15, 2018) (slip...more
The next hearing session of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) is scheduled for March 29, 2018 in Atlanta, Georgia. ...more
Judge Stearns recently clarified the scope of an almost five-year-old multi-district patent dispute in the District of Massachusetts. Since early 2013, Judge Stearns has presided over NeuroGrafix’ allegations of patent...more
In a recent multi-district case involving patent infringement allegations relating to MRI imaging, Judge Stearns granted motions for protective orders directed to untimely-served subpoenas on third party customers. The case...more
The US District Court for the Northern District of California certified classes of direct purchasers and end-payers in a pay-for-delay multidistrict litigation involving Lidoderm. In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation, Case No....more
The Supreme Court recently decided TC Heartland v. Kraft Food Group, 581 U. S. ____ (2017), which has changed the rules concerning where patent infringement lawsuits may be brought. Specifically, patent infringement actions...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Venue in a patent litigation is limited to the alleged infringer’s state of incorporation or where the defendant has committed infringing acts and has a regular and established place of business....more
The Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, unanimously holding that, for the purpose of the patent venue statute 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), “a domestic corporation...more
The Supreme Court’s recent decision on patent venue, TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, may actually turn out to be a good thing for patentees when it comes to Section 101. But before we get to that, let’s do the...more
The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in TC Heartland, LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, LLC, overturns almost three decades of Federal Circuit jurisprudence on the issue of where a patent holder may properly file suit. In a...more
In its decision of May 22, 2017 in Heartland v. Kraft, the United States Supreme Court held that the specific venue provisions applicable to Patent infringement (28 U.S.C. 1400 (b)) limited the courts in which a domestic...more
On May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its long awaited opinion in T.C. Heartland L.L.C. v. Kraft Food Brands, L.L.C., No. 16-341 (U.S. May 22, 2017)—easily one of its most consequential rulings in patent law in several...more