Latest Posts › Patents

Share:

Federal Circuit Affirms Obviousness of Rifaximin Polymorph Patents and Denial of Motion to Modify Judgment After Post-Trial...

In a precedential opinion issued on April 11, 2024 in Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc., Nos. 22-2153, 23-1952, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court for...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies That Secondary Considerations Must Be Considered Both Individually And As A Whole In An Obviousness...

On August 24, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Volvo Penta of the Ams. LLC v. Brunswick Corp., Case No. 22-1765, vacated a Final Written Decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) holding...more

Supreme Court Unanimously Affirms Amgen Repatha® Antibody Patents Invalid for Lack of Enablement

On May 19, 2023, the Supreme Court in Amgen v. Sanofi, No. 21-757, unanimously held that the claims of two Amgen patents, both directed to a genus of potentially millions of antibodies, are invalid because the patents failed...more

Making Bacon Still Requires a Significant Contribution for Joint Inventorship

Last week, in Hip, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corporation, No. 2022-1696 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2023), the Federal Circuit reversed Delaware District Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly’s decision to add an unnamed inventor onto a patent for...more

5/11/2023  /  Inventors , Joint Inventors , Patents

Federal Circuit Affirms Delisting of REMS System Patent from FDA Orange Book

On February 24, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc., v. Avadel CNS Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Case No. 23-1186, affirmed a decision from the District Court of Delaware directing...more

Federal Circuit Resolves District Court Split, Holds Foreign Defendant Cannot Defeat Rule 4(k)(2) Personal Jurisdiction by...

On January 9, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re Stingray IP Solutions, LLC, No. 23-102 granted a writ of mandamus, vacating a decision of the Eastern District Court of Texas which had...more

Eastern District of Texas Holds Willful Infringement Knowledge Requirement May Be Satisfied by Informing Non-Party of Infringement...

On October 5, 2022, U.S. Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne of the Eastern District of Texas recommended denying-in-part a motion for summary judgment of no willful infringement, holding that requisite knowledge of the asserted...more

Judge Albright Holds Willful Infringement Pleading Does Not Require Allegations of Egregious Infringing Behavior

On July 12, 2022, U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright of the Western District of Texas denied alleged infringer Lenovo’s motion to dismiss ACQIS’s willful and indirect infringement and enhanced damages claims, holding that...more

Judge Alsup Certifies Two Hot Button Issues on Standard for Pleading Willful Infringement for Interlocutory Appeal to the CAFC

On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more

A Business Deal Could Kill Your Right to Challenge a Patent’s Validity

Last week, the Federal Circuit issued a decision holding that parties can contractually bargain away their rights to file petitions for Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“the Board”). This...more

California District Court Sides with Majority Position, Dismissing Willful and Induced Infringement Claims that Relied on Original...

On January 18, 2022, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner of the Central District of California sided with the majority of divided district courts, dismissing claims of willful and induced infringement that based the...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies that Willful Infringement Does Not Require Egregious Conduct

On September 28, 2021, in a precedential opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Nos. 2020-1685, -1704, clarified its decision from a prior appeal in the...more

Federal Circuit Reiterates Requirement under § 287 that Alleged Infringers have Notice of Specific Alleged Infringement

Earlier this month in Lubby Holdings LLC et al. v. Chung, No. 2019-2286 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 1, 2021), the Federal Circuit overturned a damages award stemming from a finding of patent infringement because the plaintiff did not...more

Patent Owner Tip #17 for Surviving an Instituted IPR: Alternatives to Motions to Amend in IPR Proceedings

After an inter partes review (“IPR”) is instituted, a patent owner may move to amend challenged claims to overcome the prior art. However, there are also alternative paths to amending claims over the prior art even after an...more

PTAB statistics show interesting trends for Orange Book and biologic patents in AIA proceedings

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) regularly tracks statistics regarding administrative trials conducted under the processes created by the America Invents Act (“AIA”), which provide insight into recent trends...more

Patent Owner Tip #12 for Surviving an Instituted IPR: Address Individual Claims – Dependent Claims Can Save the Day

In inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the PTAB will often uphold the validity of dependent claims despite finding the independent claim invalid. Dependent claims recite additional limitations that must be separately...more

Patent Owner Tip #7 for Surviving an Instituted IPR: Work with Your Expert to Make the Declaration Navigable and Well Supported

Expert declarations are an essential component of any patent owner’s effort to survive an instituted inter partes review (“IPR”). The Board relies heavily on expert testimony in order to evaluate and understand the technology...more

The Federal Circuit Provides New Guidance for Patent Licensees Wishing to Challenge the Licensed Patent’s Validity

The Federal Circuit in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated handed down a decision on April 7, 2021 that provides guidance on the determination of standing for patent licensees who wish to contest the validity of a patent or...more

Patent Owner Tip #2 for Surviving An Instituted IPR: Don’t Swing for the Fences in IPR Depositions

As discussed in our previous post, one of the most critical tasks for Patent Owners during the Inter Partes Reviews (“IPR”) discovery period is deposing the Petitioner’s expert. Since IPR depositions are treated differently...more

District of Delaware Recites Policy Rationale for Dismissing Willful and Indirect Infringement Claims for Failure to Plead...

On March 24, 2021, U.S. District Judge Colm F. Connolly of the District of Delaware, granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss claims for contributory and induced infringement and enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 because...more

Tip #6 for Avoiding IPR Institution: Advocate Claim Constructions the Petition Ignored

Arguing against material constructions proffered by an IPR petition is a basic building block of the patent owner’s preliminary response. Obviously, patent owners must investigate and advocate for claim constructions for...more

No Pleading, No Problem: Court Denies Motion to Dismiss and Bifurcates Willful Infringement Determination, in Absence of...

Recently in Nike, Inc. v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc., 2:17-cv-08509 (C.D. Cal.) (October 26, 2020), the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted-in-part and denied-in-part Defendant, Skechers U.S.A.,...more

Tip #5 for Avoiding IPR Institution: Policing KSR’s motivation requirement for the ‘how’ and ‘why’.

Building on Tip #4, one effective way to avoid institution and not address facts is to point out shortcomings in the petition's application of KSR when asserting motivation to combine for an obviousness analysis. The Patent...more

In Hatch-Waxman litigation, Federal Circuit restricts venue under the TC Heartland to districts relating to ANDA filings

On November 5, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Valeant Pharmaceuticals N. Am. LLC v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 19-2402, resolved a split among district courts over what constitutes...more

Tip #3 for Avoiding IPR Institution: Use Disclaimers Strategically

Under U.S. patent law, “No inter partes review will be instituted based on disclaimed claims.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.107(e). And petitioners only need to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to one...more

53 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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