On January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. holding that “clear error,” not “de novo,” is the correct standard of appellate review for underlying factual...more
1/21/2015
/ Claim Construction ,
Clear Error Standard ,
De Novo Standard of Review ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Popular ,
SCOTUS ,
Teva v Sandoz
New York State and its four U.S. district courts – the Northern District (N.D.N.Y.), Southern District (S.D.N.Y.), Eastern District (E.D.N.Y.), and Western District (W.D.N.Y.) – have been well-known venues for IP cases. How...more
The Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. vs. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (decided June 19, 2014) (“Alice”) is an important decision that will have an impact on software and computer-related inventions. In its...more
Today, Lex Machina released its “2013 Patent Litigation Year in Review” report. The Lex Machina report includes comprehensive statistics over many different verticals — patents, parties, districts, judges, rulings, etc. The...more
All four U.S. District Courts in New York — the Northern District (N.D.N.Y.), Southern District (S.D.N.Y.), Eastern District (E.D.N.Y.), and Western District (W.D.N.Y.) — have enacted Local Patent Rules. S.D.N.Y. and...more
In this issue:
- Special Report: US Supreme Court Will Decide Key IP Cases in 2014
- Patent Litigation: Strategies to Battle NPEs: Lessons from the Front Lines
- Design Patents: The Federal Circuit...more
Patent lawsuits brought by non-practicing entities (“NPEs”), sometimes referred to as “patent trolls,” can be expensive for companies defending such lawsuits. Indeed, according to a 2013 survey by the American Intellectual...more