Latest Posts › Patent Litigation

Share:

United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

In earlier times, the Federal Circuit, responding to efforts by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to reject patent applications directed to biotechnology-related inventions, held (In re Brana) that utility of such...more

Amici Support Reversal of PTAB Decision in CRISPR Interference

Two amici have filed briefs in support of the appeal by Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") of the decision by the Patent Trial and...more

Broad Files Opening Brief and Cross-Appeal in CRISPR Interference

The decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in favor of Senior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") and against Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the...more

Drugs May Cost Too Much, But Patents Are Not the Cause

For at least a decade, Congress has been concerned (not to say obsessed) with drug costs (understandably so, no matter how ineffective; see "FTC to the Rescue Regarding High Drug Prices and Patents"; "Even More Ill-Conceived...more

SNIPR Technologies Ltd. v. Rockefeller University (Fed. Cir. 2023)

One of the wonderful (as in, it makes one wonder) and frustrating (which needs no explanation) aspects of patent law is that just when you think a question is settled it either isn't or the conventional interpretation is...more

CVC Appeals PTAB Decision in CRISPR Interference

The decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in favor of Senior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") and against Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the...more

Medytox, Inc. v. Galderma S.A. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

It is not surprising that the Federal Circuit has taken the opportunity to apply the Supreme Court's recent precedent in Amgen v. Sanofi regarding the sufficiency of disclosure needed to satisfy the statutory enablement...more

Senator Coons And Co-Sponsors Introduce the PREVAIL Act

In addition to his efforts regarding patent subject matter eligibility law (see "Senate Bill Proposed to Provide Subject Matter Eligibility Solution", co-sponsored with Senator Tillis), Senator Coons, joined by Senators...more

In re Couvaras (Fed. Cir. 2023)

The Federal Circuit provided a reminder last week that merely identifying an unappreciated consequence of a prior art method cannot confer non-obviousness on practice of methods that did not acknowledge that consequence, in...more

Congress’ latest attempt to address subject matter eligibility

Through the vicissitudes of the continuing chaos of subject matter eligibility, Senators Coons and Tillis have been steadfast in attempting to provide a legislative solution. They chaired a series of Congressional hearings in...more

Senate Bill Proposed to Provide Subject Matter Eligibility Solution

Through the vicissitudes of the continuing chaos of subject matter eligibility, Senators Coons and Tillis have been steadfast in attempting to provide a legislative solution.  They chaired a series of Congressional hearings...more

Judge Newman Matter Continues

The Federal Circuit's Special Committee released two documents relevant to their continuing assessment of Judge Pauline Newman's fitness for the bench today, neither of which can be considered comforting to the patent...more

Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

In its recent review of a district court decision the Federal Circuit characterized as "a thorough opinion," the Federal Circuit affirmed invalidation for obviousness of four claims from four different Orange Book-listed...more

Can Judge Michel (and John Duffy) Convince the Supreme Court to Revisit Subject Matter Eligibility?

Einstein's aphorism that doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is a hallmark of madness (or at least an inability to learn from the past) inevitably comes to mind when perusing the recent...more

Supreme Court Renders Decision in Amgen v. Sanofi: Three Takeaways

The Supreme Court handed down its decision in Amgen v. Sanofi today. In Justice Gorsuch’s unanimous opinion, the Court held that the scope of the claims at issue were much broader than the 26 expressly disclosed antibodies....more

Supreme Court Decides Amgen v. Sanofi; Status Quo Extended

The Supreme Court handed down its decision in Amgen v. Sanofi today. In Justice Gorsuch’s unanimous opinion, the Court held that the scope of the claims at issue were much broader than the 26 expressly disclosed antibodies....more

Amicus Briefing in Amgen v. Sanofi: The Rest of the Story - Part III

The Supreme Court's consideration of the standards for satisfying the enablement provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) has been occasioned for the first time in over a century by the Court's granting certiorari in Amgen v....more

Amicus Briefing in Amgen v. Sanofi: The Rest of the Story - Part II

The Supreme Court's consideration of the standards for satisfying the enablement provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) has been occasioned for the first time in over a century by the Court's granting certiorari in Amgen v....more

Amicus Briefing in Amgen v. Sanofi: The Rest of the Story

The Supreme Court's consideration of the standards for satisfying the enablement provisions of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) has been occasioned for the first time in over a century by the Court's granting certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi. ...more

Solicitor General Weighs in on Patent Eligibility Question

The Solicitor General, responding to a call from the Supreme Court for the government’s views, in April filed a brief directed to the proper legal standard for the “abstract idea” exception to patent eligibility under 35...more

Stanford Asks Supreme Court to Revisit Subject Matter Eligibility on Diagnostic Claims

"Hope springs eternal [in the human breast]" (Alexander Pope) and "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" (the latter attributed variably to Albert Einstein and Werner Erhart) are two...more

Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

An appellant's burden on appeal is never easy but it is particularly difficult when the questions at issue are based on factual evidence.  The appellate judiciary is loathe (generally) to second guess a district court judge...more

Arbutus Biopharma Corp. v. ModernaTx, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

"This application claims priority to [properly identified earlier-filed application, the disclosure of which is expressly incorporated herein in its entirety" is a phrase commonly found in patents and patent applications as...more

The Supreme Court Grapples with Patent Enablement - April 2023

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Amgen v. Sanofi last week in an extended session with argument from the parties and the U.S. government.  Petitioner was represented by Jeffrey Lamken, Respondents by Paul Clement, and...more

Esteemed Scientists File Amicus Brief in Amgen v. Sanofi on Respondents' Behalf

During oral argument before the Supreme Court on Monday in Amgen v. Sanofi, all three advocates (Jeff Lamken for Amgen, Paul Clement for Sanofi, and Colleen Sindzak for the United States) had reason to reference and discuss...more

467 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 19

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide