On November 21, 2023, the Federal Circuit in Purdue Pharma L.P et al. v. Collegium Pharm., Inc. (i) affirmed that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) has authority to issue a Final Written Decision after the statutory...more
On June 14, 2023, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board upholding an Examiner’s rejection of all pending claims in U.S. Patent Application 15/131,442 (’442 application). The Federal...more
Today the Federal Circuit affirmed the December 27, 2022 judgement issued by Judge Stanley R. Chesler of the District of New Jersey in favor of Takeda Pharmaceuticals, protecting Takeda’s patented Vyvanse® product from...more
On December 27, 2022, Haug Partners LLP and Gibbons PC obtained a key victory as to all counts for its client, plaintiffs Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. and Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., defeating a generic challenge...more
Patent practitioners are familiar with Inter Partes Review (IPR), a common adversarial proceeding between a patent owner and a third party concerning patentability of an issued United States Patent conducted by the Patent...more
On June 21, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”), in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., granted petition for panel rehearing, vacated its prior decision, and reversed the...more
As the world marched forward in the face of the lingering covid-19 global pandemic, the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit followed suit, issuing several noteworthy decisions of which patent litigators should be aware in 2022....more
12/31/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Induced Infringement ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pleading Standards ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO
On February 22, 2021, the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time whether collateral estoppel (i.e., issue preclusion) was applicable in inter partes reexamination proceedings. The case is SynQor, Inc. v. Vicor Corp.,...more
The year 2020 brought significant change to many sectors of life, and patent law was no exception. Throughout the year, the U.S. Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit handed down several notable decisions that have and will...more
1/8/2021
/ § 315(b) ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Principal Place of Business ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
USPTO