In Amneal Pharmacueticals LLC v. Almirall, LLC, the Federal Circuit professed to address a question it had not considered before: whether attorney's fees and a exceptional case determination was available for fees and costs...more
6/9/2020
/ Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Counterclaims ,
Exceptional Case ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry
Lions (Panthera leo) once were a widely distributed group of terrestrial mammals, ranging during the Pleistocene (from about 2,580,000 to 11,700 years ago) in Eurasia, Africa, and North America, with species that included the...more
In the Supreme Court's recent clarifying campaign through the Federal Circuit's U.S. patent law jurisprudence, one section of the statute, 35 U.S.C. §112(a) has been noticeably left unscathed. Indeed, avoidance of this...more
6/1/2020
/ Claim Limitations ,
Denial of Certiorari ,
Expert Testimony ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Prior Art ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 112 ,
Statutory Requirements ,
Written Descriptions
The human tendency to identify with tribes of "like" humans (related by family, place of origin, or religion, among other bases) was perverted during the Twentieth Century (and in some places remains so today) into the idea...more
Gregor Mendel's great good fortune (or extraordinary prescience) was that he chose for the traits he used to illustrate the genetic control of inheritance (despite having no inkling of its mechanism) traits in his pea plants...more
On Monday, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) heard oral argument (remotely) from Senior Party the Broad Institute (and its partners as Senior Party, Harvard University and MIT) and Junior Party the University of...more
5/22/2020
/ CRISPR ,
DNA ,
Interference Proceeding ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Nonobvious ,
Obviousness ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art
By Kevin E. Noonan -- For several years, Sigma Aldrich has been prosecuting several applications (including USSNs 15/188,911; 15/188,924; and 15/456,204) claiming CRISPR technology that (it alleged) would be deserving of an...more
The 2019 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy provides a list of such markets (the NML), of both physical and virtual (online) varieties. These include...more
5/15/2020
/ Copyright Infringement ,
Counterfeiting ,
Cyber Crimes ,
Digital Marketplace ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Malware ,
Notorious Markets List (NML) ,
Patent Infringement ,
Piracy ,
Risk Assessment ,
Risk Mitigation ,
Section 301 ,
Trademark Infringement ,
USTR
Infringement under the doctrine of equivalents (as a basis of a successful cause of action having renewed vigor before the Federal Circuit recently (see, e.g., "Galderma Laboratories, L.P. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC") is...more
5/13/2020
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
Declaration ,
Dedication-Disclosure Defense ,
Dismissals ,
Doctrine of Equivalents ,
Expert Witness ,
Judgment As A Matter Of Law ,
Judicial Discretion ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Prosecution History Estoppel ,
Reaffirmation
On April 29th, Ambassador Robert Lighthizer, U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), issued the 2020 Special 301 Report. In a press release, the USTR stated that "[t]he Trump Administration is committed to holding intellectual...more
On April 22, 2020, the Federal Circuit "grappled," as the opinion put it, with the equitable doctrine of assignor estoppel in Hologic, Inc. v. Minerva Surgical, Inc., the Federal Circuit "grappled," as the opinion put it,...more
5/12/2020
/ Appeals ,
Apportionment ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Damages ,
IP License ,
Obviousness ,
Parallel Proceedings ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Unclean Hands
The Federal Circuit continued its explication of the standing issue for unsuccessful petitioners in inter partes review (see "Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2020)") in Pfizer Inc. v....more
5/11/2020
/ Appeals ,
Burden of Proof ,
Dismissals ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pfizer ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Standing
Last week, the Federal Circuit had the occasion to address anew the requirements for standing to appeal an adverse decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review proceeding under Article III of the...more
On April 20th, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) set oral argument in Interference No. 106,155, between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively,...more
5/5/2020
/ Court Schedules ,
CRISPR ,
DNA ,
Interference Claims ,
Life Sciences ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Public Hearing ,
Teleconferences
In 1984, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) shepherded a grand legislative compromise through Congress that balanced the rights and solved inefficient regulatory consequences for both branded and generic...more
5/4/2020
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
Appeals ,
Dismissals ,
Generic Drugs ,
Hatch-Waxman ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Term Extensions ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Reaffirmation
On April 17th, CVC filed its Reply to Broad's Opposition (filed on April 9th) to CVC's Miscellaneous Motion No. 2 to Exclude Evidence filed (on April 2nd), in Interference No 106,155 between Senior Party The Broad Institute,...more
4/28/2020
/ Admissible Evidence ,
CRISPR ,
Cross Examination ,
Daubert Standards ,
DNA ,
Expert Witness ,
Hearsay ,
Interference Claims ,
Motion to Exclude ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petitioner Reply Briefs ,
Prior Art
On March 23rd, Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") filed its Reply to Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University...more
On March 23rd Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") filed its Reply to Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University...more
Yesterday, in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP, the Supreme Court ruled that the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b), which preclude a petitioner from filing an inter partes review petition more than one year after...more
4/21/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims
Yesterday, in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP[i], the Supreme Court ruled that the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)[ii], which preclude a petitioner from filing an inter partes review petition more than one year...more
4/21/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
There are (at least) two ways of looking at the course of the Federal Circuit's evolving interpretation of the Supreme Court's subject matter eligibility jurisprudence under Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Labs.,...more
4/20/2020
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Appeals ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Dismissals ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Mayo v. Prometheus ,
Mobile Health Apps ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Section 101
The latest installment in the cat-and-mouse game of deciding priority in Interference No 106,155 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively,...more
4/18/2020
/ CRISPR ,
Cross Examination ,
Expert Testimony ,
Hearsay ,
Hearsay Exceptions ,
Inadmissible Evidence ,
Interference Claims ,
Life Sciences ,
Motion to Exclude ,
Objections ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art
March 23rd was the deadline for the parties in Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") and Junior Party the...more
The procedural niceties of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's implementation of the post-grant review features of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act continue to be explicated in the Federal Circuit (and of course, the...more
4/15/2020
/ Adidas ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
Appeals ,
Due Process ,
Motion to Amend ,
Nike ,
Notice and Comment ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Cancellation ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal
March 23rd was a busy day at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) regarding Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology...more
4/15/2020
/ CRISPR ,
DNA ,
Expert Witness ,
Genetic Testing ,
Interference Claims ,
Life Sciences ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petitioner Reply Briefs ,
Priority Rules ,
Universities