Neither the fact that a damages expert’s testimony could have been presented more clearly, nor the fact that the methodology could be subject to reasonable disagreement, is a basis to exclude the expert’s testimony....more
Challenged instructions that the PTO’s Director gave to the PTAB regarding discretionary denial of inter partes review petitions are general statements of policy and thus not subject to the notice-and-comment rulemaking...more
WILLIS ELECTRIC CO., LTD. v. POLYGROUP LTD. (MACAO COMMERCIAL OFFSHORE) - Before Moore, Stark, and Oetken (sitting by designation). Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Neither the fact...more
NETFLIX, INC. V. DIVX, LLC - Before Moore, Dyk, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Common principles of English grammar may be used to identify the presumptively correct interpretation of a disputed...more
APPLE INC. v. SQUIRES - Before Lourie, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Challenged instructions that the PTO’s Director gave to the PTAB regarding...more
A federal bankruptcy court on November 18 formally approved Purdue’s $7.4 billion Chapter 11 plan to settle thousands of opioid-related lawsuits. The plan requires (1) a $6.5 billion contribution from the Sackler family...more
On December 5, 2025, the Skinny Labels, Big Savings Act (H.R. 6485) was introduced in the House of Representatives. The bill, if enacted, would shield certain drug manufacturers who have submitted drug applications to the...more
Beginning on October 20, 2025, recently confirmed United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John A. Squires met with European Patent Office (EPO) Vice-President Steve Rowan and Japanese Patent Office (JPO)...more
On October 3, 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) unveiled a pilot prioritization program that provides for accelerated review of abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for generic companies that test and...more
On October 11, 2024, Edwards filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. The question presented, as framed by Edwards, is: “Whether, under Hatch-Waxman’s safe harbor, an infringing act is “solely...more
As we previously discussed, on November 7, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) sent warning letters to certain drug manufacturers regarding their purportedly improper listings of device patents in the Food and Drug...more
7/17/2024
/ Antitrust Provisions ,
Class Action ,
Consumer Protection Laws ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Medical Devices ,
Orange Book ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Unfair Competition ,
Warning Letters
As we recently discussed, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) sent warning letters to certain drug manufacturers regarding their purportedly improper listing of device patents in the Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”)...more
3/18/2024
/ Antitrust Violations ,
Biotechnology ,
Enforcement Actions ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Food & Drug Regulations ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Life Sciences ,
Manufacturers ,
Medical Devices ,
Orange Book ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Unfair Competition ,
Warning Letters
On June 2, 2023, drug manufacturer Shire US Inc. and related entity Shire LLC (collectively, “Shire”) asked the Supreme Court to review an Eleventh Circuit ruling involving the interplay between state tort law and FDA...more
On March 29, 2023, the Solicitor General of the United States asked the Supreme Court to review a Federal Circuit judgment in a Hatch-Waxman case between Teva and GSK. In its decision below, the Federal Circuit held that Teva...more
COSMOKEY SOLUTIONS GMBH & CO. KG V. DUO SECURITY LLC -
Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Patent claims directed to...more
On February 26, 2021, Judge James Donato of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted final approval of a proposed $650 million settlement in a biometric privacy class action lawsuit brought...more
QUIKTRIP WEST, INC. V. WEIGEL STORES, INC.
Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Reyna. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: When comparing marks under the Dupont factors, the Board may give less weight to...more
It well known that there are, unfortunately, many data breaches that frequently put private citizens’ data privacy in jeopardy. States have passed a variety of statutes aimed at addressing this problem in an attempt to...more
11/25/2020
/ Article III ,
Breach of Contract ,
Class Action ,
Credit Monitoring ,
Cybersecurity ,
Data Breach ,
Data Privacy ,
Debit and Credit Card Transactions ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Macy's ,
Personal Information ,
Popular ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Spokeo v Robins ,
Standing ,
State Data Breach Notification Statutes ,
Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices
On April 20, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court granted writ of certiorari in Van Buren v. United States to consider whether a person who is authorized to access information on a computer for certain purposes violates Section...more
NEVILLE v. FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTORS, INC.
Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
Summary: The Federal Circuit affirmed a construction of...more
In Re Personal Web Technologies LLC -
Before Wallach, Bryson, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Summary: The Kessler doctrine is not limited to cases...more
BOZEMAN FINANCIAL LLC V. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK -
Before Lourie, Dyk, and Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System but are operationally distinct...more
HOSPIRA, INC. V. FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC -
Before Lourie, Dyk, and Moore. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Summary: Evidence of the properties of claimed embodiments may be...more
1/13/2020
/ Admissible Evidence ,
Appeals ,
Extrinsic Evidence ,
Hospira ,
Inherency ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reaffirmation
GUANGDONG ALISON HI-TECH CO. V. ITC -
Before Wallach, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from United States International Trade Commission.
Summary: A term of degree is not indefinite so long as the written description provides...more
KOLCRAFT ENTERPRISES, INC. V. GRACO CHILDREN’S PRODUCTS, INC.
Before Moore, Reyna, and Chen. Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Inventor testimony of prior conception must be independently...more
7/9/2019
/ Design Patent ,
Electronically Stored Information ,
Evidence ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Inventors ,
Metadata ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Testimony