Supreme Court of the United States Patents

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court to Hear Argument on March 31 Whether to Overrule Brulotte v. Thys, Co.

Fifty years ago, the Supreme Court held in Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U.S. 29 (1964) that a license agreement requiring royalty payments for use of a patented invention after expiration of the patent term is unlawful per se. ...more

The Tyranny of the Judiciary

There has always been a tension between the need for a final arbiter of the law and the inherent power associated with such a role placed in the judicial branch. Jefferson himself was wary of this tendency, writing in a...more

Standard of Review for Claim Construction on Appeal

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court provided guidance on the standard of review for claim construction on appeal in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-854. The Court held “[w]hen reviewing a district...more

The Plant Variety Protection Act—An Increasingly Important Form of Intellectual Property Protection for Plants

As part of their treaty obligations in establishing International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV), member countries have enacted laws that provide ‘‘Plant Breeders’ Rights’’ for protecting the...more

Supreme Court: Patent Claim Construction – Two Standards Of Review

The Supreme Court recently decided a patent case involving a significant procedural issue. In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S.Ct. 831 (1/20/15), the question before the Court was whether the Federal...more

Solicitor General Argues that Antitrust Principles Do Not Warrant Overturning Brulotte

On Friday the Solicitor General filed an amicus brief in Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises. As we previously noted, in Kimble, the Supreme Court will consider whether to overturn Brulotte v. Thys Co., a 50-year-old precedent...more

The Supreme Court's New Standard of Appellate Review for Claim Construction

On January 20, 2015, the United States Supreme Court redefined the standard of appellate review for claim construction. In Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court vacated well-established Federal Circuit...more

February 2015: Patent Litigation Update

Supreme Court to Review Good Faith Defense to Patent Inducement Claims. Last month in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 720 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2013), cert. granted in part, No. 13-896, 2014 WL 318394 (U.S. Dec. 5,...more

MBHB Snippets: Review of Developments in Intellectual Property Law: Winter 2015 - Vol. 13, Issue 1

In This Issue: - Tips for Developing a Cost-Effective Foreign Patent Strategy - Supreme Court Holds that Trademark Tacking Should be Decided by a Jury in Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank - Amending...more

Federal Circuit Review - February 2015

More Deference to District Courts in Claim Construction - In TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. v. SANDOZ, INC., No. 13-854, the Supreme Court held that factual findings underpinning claim construction rulings are reviewed...more

Polsinelli Podcasts - Hear How the SCOTUS Ruling May Impact Patent-Eligible Subject Matter for Software [Video]

After the Alice decision last summer by the Supreme Court, a large number of business method and software patents have been invalidated or found unpatentable by federal courts and the Patent Office as being drawn to abstract...more

Supreme Court Announces Standard of Review for Factual Issues Underlying Patent Claim Construction: Implications Beyond Patent Law

The United States Supreme Court, clarifying the proper standard of review of factual findings arising during a court’s construction of patent claims, held that such “evidentiary underpinnings” should be reviewed for clear...more

Post-Alice District Court Decisions Regarding the Patent Eligibility of Computer-Implemented Inventions

It has been about 9 months since Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International was decided by the Supreme Court. In that time, many district court and Federal Circuit cases have resulted in grants of summary judgment or dismissal...more

The Supreme Court's Growing Intellectual Property Docket

In the closing decades of the twentieth century, the United States Supreme Court appeared to follow an informal policy of benign neglect toward the law of intellectual property. The Court entertained a case every few years...more

Will Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. Change Patent Litigation?

On January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its first patent decision of the current term, rejecting the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s long-standing practice of reviewing district court patent...more

"Federal Circuit Wrestles With Patent Eligibility of Internet-Based Business Methods"

When are Internet-based business methods eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101? In 2014, the Supreme Court laid the groundwork for the Federal Circuit to grapple with this question, when it decided Alice Corp....more

The Death of Induced Infringement (According to the Supreme Court)?

In its June 2, 2014 decision, Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., the Supreme Court unanimously overturned a previous Federal Circuit ruling, holding that a defendant will not be liable for induced...more

Supreme Court Update: TEVA Pharmaceuticals USA V. Sandoz (13-584); Department Of Homeland Security V. Maclean (13-894); Holt V....

Greetings, Court fans! While we in New Haven were more-or-less spared having to dig out from "Winter Storm Juno" (aka "snowbigdeal"), it's taken us a while to dig out from the Court's recent pile of opinions. With this...more

Supreme Court: Claim Construction Is Subject to Hybrid Review - Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz, Inc.

In a 7–2 decision penned by Justice Breyer, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the de novo standard as the sole standard of review issues arising in claim construction. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz,...more

IP Newsflash - January 2015 #4

DISTRICT COURT CASES - Akin Gump Wins Section 101 Motion to Dismiss, Invalidating 887 Patent Claims - Following Supreme Court precedent set forth in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, Judge Sleet...more

Has the Machine-or-Transformation Test Returned to Prominence in Patent Cases?

The machine-or-transformation test was once the gatekeeper of patent eligibility, but that reign ended in 2010 when the Supreme Court stated in Bilski that it is not the sole test for determining patentability. By 2013 the...more

Practice Considerations Post Teva v. Sandoz

In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 13-854, slip op. 574 U.S. __ (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that underlying factual issues resolved while formally construing a disputed patent claim term at the...more

Teva and Its Potential Impact on Patent Litigation

The Supreme Court recently handed down its 7-2 opinion in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. The case involved a Federal Circuit review of a district court’s determination that Teva’s patent claims were not...more

Patent Claim Construction Subject to Hybrid Review Standard

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz, Inc., U.S. No. 13-854 (Jan. 20, 2015) - Answering the long debated question of what deference the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should give in reviewing district court...more

Why Did the Supreme Court GVR the Shire Lialda Case?

On January 26, 2015, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated, and remanded Shire Development LLC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., to the Federal Circuit “for further consideration in light of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,...more

629 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 26