Hooper, Kearney and Macklin on Cutting Edge Topics in the False Claims Act
#WorkforceWednesday: New AB5 Exemptions, EEOC COVID-19 Updates, Joint-Employer Rule Partially Struck Down - Employment Law This Week®
There is little rhyme nor reason in the cases the Supreme Court decides to review. But the Court has patterns in its case selection that do (to some degree) probe what the Justices think are important questions. One pattern...more
Arthrex appealed a final written decision from an inter partes review (IPR) where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found all challenged claims of its patent anticipated. On appeal, Arthrex argued for the first time...more
In OSI Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Aoptex Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018-1925, Oct. 4, 2019), the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (Board) decision that certain claims of US Patent No. 6,900,221 were...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time whether the retroactive application of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings to pre-America Invents Act (AIA) patents is an unconstitutional taking...more
On July 30, 2019, the Federal Circuit held that retroactive application of IPR (inter partes review) proceedings to pre-AIA (America Invents Act) patents is not an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment (Celgene...more
CELGENE CORPORATION v. PETER - Before Prost, Bryson, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Retroactive application of IPR proceedings to pre-AIA patents is not an unconstitutional taking...more
Celgene Corp. v. Peter, Appeal Nos. 2018-1167, -1168, -1169 (Fed. Cir. July 30, 2019) - Celgene owned two patents that pertained to methods of safely distributing potentially hazardous drugs. The patents were challenged...more
This article discusses foreign filing requirements in the United States. Assuming the United States is the country of invention, the following questions are explored: (1) who needs to seek permission to file a patent...more
In a landmark decision on June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court held that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was required to engage in notice and comment rulemaking before publishing methodology (Medicare Fractions)...more
In one of the latest decisions in the Apple/VirnetX saga, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated that Rule 36 affirmance can create collateral estoppel. VirnetX Inc. v. Apple, Inc., Case Nos. 17-2490,...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Newman, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the PTAB. Summary: Patent Owner Vertnetx Inc. (“Virnetx”) was collaterally estopped from arguing that a reference was not a printed publication...more
PTAB Patent Challengers Beware: Starting November 13, 2018, winning may be a little more difficult - According to a rule published yesterday by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that a most-favored licensee clause allowed a licensee that paid a lump sum of $70 million to be entitled to a refund when a subsequent licensee paid a lump sum of only...more