The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has called attention in the past year to its perception of the influence that branded pharmaceutical companies have over the price of beneficial drugs. Most recently, the agency has asserted...more
6/27/2024
/ Competition ,
Drug Pricing ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Generic Drugs ,
Life Sciences ,
Orange Book ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Prescription Drugs ,
Regulatory Agenda ,
Regulatory Requirements
Two recent developments, one in the U.S. and one in the U.K., have shed further light on the intersection of patent law and artificial intelligence (AI), particularly with respect to whether AI-generated inventions can be...more
3/25/2024
/ Artificial Intelligence ,
Innovative Technology ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
UK ,
USPTO
Steep Drop in Discretionary Denials — But Will It Last?
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may be becoming more petitioner-friendly following a June 2022 memorandum that significantly narrows a precedent-setting...more
Takeaways -
Minerva Surgical v. Hologic limits the application of assignor estoppel, which bars inventor-assignors from challenging patents they obtained.
If a buyer-assignee later expands the scope of its claim, under...more
On April 20, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 7-2 decision in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP, ruling Section 314(d) of the America Invents Act (AIA) precludes the appeal of a decision by the Patent Trial...more
4/21/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
In an 8-0 decision issued on May 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court, in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, restricted the available venues for patent litigation claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1400. Under Section...more
5/25/2017
/ Forum Shopping ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Personal Jurisdiction ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Principal Place of Business ,
SCOTUS ,
State of Incorporation ,
State of Residency ,
TC Heartland LLC v Kraft Foods ,
Technology Sector ,
Venue
In a unanimous decision issued on June 19, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court found that patent claims for managing risk in a financial transaction were drawn to an abstract idea that was patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101....more
6/20/2014
/ Alice Corporation ,
America Invents Act ,
CLS Bank ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Mayo v. Prometheus ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Risk Mitigation ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
In a decision issued on June 2, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court lowered the bar for parties arguing patent indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112. Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., No. 13-369 (U.S. June 2, 2014). The...more
In a unanimous decision issued on June 2, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly tightened the requirements for proving inducement of infringement of method patent claims under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Limelight Networks, Inc....more
In companion decisions issued on April 29, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly relaxed the standard for an award of attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, LLC, ___ U.S. ___...more