Latest Posts › Patent Litigation

Share:

Another Group of Law Professors File Amicus Brief in Amgen v. Sanofi

The Supreme Court's decision to grant certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi is the first time in almost a hundred years that the Court has deigned to consider sufficiency of disclosure decisions, in this case enablement under 35...more

U.S. Government Files Amicus Brief in Amgen v. Sanofi

The Supreme Court's decision to grant certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi is the first time in almost a hundred years that the Court has deigned to consider sufficiency of disclosure decisions, in this case enablement under 35...more

AbbVie Files Amicus Brief in Amgen v. Sanofi

The Supreme Court's decision to grant certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi is the first time in almost a hundred years that the Court has deigned to consider sufficiency of disclosure decisions, in this case enablement under 35...more

GlaxoSmithKline Files Amicus Brief in Amgen v. Sanofi

The Supreme Court's decision to grant certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi is the first time in almost a hundred years that the Court has deigned to consider sufficiency of disclosure decisions, in this case enablement under 35...more

Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

The Supreme Court's (re)consideration of the enablement requirement expected in its decision later this year in Amgen v. Sanofi may be the most closely watched patent case since AMP v. Myriad Genetics.  But in a decision...more

Sanofi and Regeneron File Respondents' Brief on Amgen v. Sanofi

Sanofi and Regeneron filed their brief at the Supreme Court in Amgen v. Sanofi, in which Amgen seeks to have the Court overturn the District Court's grant of JMOL in the issue of whether Amgen's claims were invalid for...more

Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

Minerva and Hologic, competitors selling devices used for ablating uterine endometrial tissue, are notable for their dispute last year that gave the Supreme Court an opportunity to reassess an established patent law doctrine,...more

Chromadex, Inc. v. Elysium Health, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

Judge Giles Sutherland Rich, famous for many things (including being the principal author of the 1952 Patent Act and in particular Section 103, which cabined at least for a while the Supreme Court’s penchant for invalidating...more

Astellas US LLC v. Hospira, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

In perhaps one of his most infelicitous lyrics* Bob Dylan inserted the adage that it is unwise to change horses in midstream.  This lesson comes to mind with regard to the Federal Circuit's decision late last year regarding...more

Amgen Files Its Principal Brief in Amgen v. Sanofi

Facing what is likely to be something of an uphill battle in seeking to have the Federal Circuit's decision against it in Amgen v Sanofi overturned before a not always patent-friendly Supreme Court, Amgen in late December...more

The New York Times Is at It Again Regarding Patents

It's always good to have a villain, a "Snidely Whiplash" or other cartoon caricature to support an argument, especially if the issue is complex and fails the cocktail party test...more

PTAB Rules on Preliminary Motions in Interference No. 106,133

On December 14th*, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board rendered its decision on Preliminary Motions in Interference No. 106,133 between Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich and Junior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and...more

Dionex Softron GmbH v. Agilent Technologies, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

As the dodo of patent practice, the number of interferences has been steadily dwindling since enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act in 2012 abolished the practice in favor of a "first inventor to file" regime and a...more

Genentech, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court judgment of invalidity for obviousness and for noninfringement for a series of patents challenged in ANDA litigation, in Genentech Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.  In doing so, a...more

PTAB Redeclares Interference No. 106,132 and Suspends Priority Phase Proceedings

On December 14th, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rendered its Decision on Motions in Interference No 106,132 between Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich ("Sigma") and Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the...more

PTAB Decides Parties' Motions in CRISPR Interference

Having heard oral argument at a hearing held on Monday, November 21st, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on December 14th entered its decision on motions in Interference No 106,132 between Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich ("Sigma")...more

A Better, CRISPR World Assayed in The New York Times

Idealism is a wonderful and at the same time frustrating character trait, because the world is not ideal as it is and is unlikely to ever be, but the motivation to achieve a more ideal world (or at least a more equitable one)...more

Pharmacyclics LLC v. Alvogen, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

On November 15th, the Federal Circuit handed down its opinion affirming all aspects of the District Court's decision in Pharmacyclics LLC v. Alvogen, Inc.  The case illustrates once more the importance of the substantial...more

Alternative Reasoning for Supreme Court's Life Sciences Subject Matter Eligibility Jurisprudence

Last week, IP Law360 published an erudite and provocative article by Joseph Matal and his colleagues regarding the Supreme Court's recent subject matter jurisprudence in the context of earlier decisions in the 19th and early...more

Oral Arguments Scheduled in CRISPR Interferences

On October 24th, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board scheduled back-to-back oral hearings for interferences between Sigma-Aldrich (Senior Party) and Junior Party The Regents of the University of California, University of...more

Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi: High Court Will Tackle Proper Enablement Standard

The Supreme Court on Friday, Nov. 3, granted Amgen’s petition for certiorari on the second of the Questions Presented in its petition...more

Scientists File Amicus Brief in Interference No. 106,115

Early last month, a group of scientists* filed an amici curiae brief in support of the appeal by Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC")...more

CVC Files Appeal Brief in Interference No. 106,115

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (like its predecessor, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences or BPAI) occasionally renders an opinion having the tendency to raise an eyebrow or two, which on occasion has led the...more

PTAB Renders Decisions in Interference No. 106,127

On September 28, 2022, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied all preliminary motions by Junior Party the University of California, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") and Senior Party...more

PTAB Renders Decisions in Interference No. 106,126

On September 18, 2022, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied all preliminary motions by Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") and Senior Party ToolGen in Interference No....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