News & Analysis as of

Denial of Certiorari Patent Litigation

Sunstein LLP

The Kessler Doctrine: An Expanded Form of Preclusion Unique to Patent Litigation

Sunstein LLP on

Late last year, the Federal Circuit affirmed an award of over $5 million in attorneys’ fees in favor of the defendants in PersonalWeb v. Patreon. In addressing the propriety of the award, the Federal Circuit also took the...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Denies Petition Arguing for Preclusive Effects of PTAB Decisions Pending Appeal

Jones Day on

On February 20, 2024, the Supreme Court denied Liquidia Technologies’ petition for a writ of certiorari to review a precedential Federal Circuit decision, United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Techs., Inc., 74 F.4th 1360...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

GSK v. Teva's Continued Ripple Effects

As we continue to assess the ripple effects from the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in GlaxoSmithKline v Teva Pharms USA (GSK v Teva), a recent decision by Judge Andrews in the U.S. District Court for the District of...more

BakerHostetler

The Supreme Court Again Declines To Reevaluate Subject Matter Eligibility of Diagnostic Claims

BakerHostetler on

The Supreme Court seemed, at least to a small degree, interested in evaluating the subject matter eligibility of diagnostic claims when it requested that the respondents (Natera Inc. and Eurofins Viracor Inc.) respond to a...more

A&O Shearman

SCOTUS denies cert in skinny label appeal from the Federal Circuit

A&O Shearman on

On May 15, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States denied Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.’s (“Teva”) petition for certiorari in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, ending a nearly nine-year court...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Axinn IP Update: Supreme Court Denies Cert. in Skinny Label Case, but the Impacts from GSK v. Teva Continue

Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, 22-37, locking in the Federal Circuit’s second panel decision (hereafter “GSK v. Teva”), which held that Teva’s attempted...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

CareDx, Inc. v. Natera, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose - Judge Moore, in Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC stated the obvious when she said in her dissent: My colleagues' refusal deflates the Amici's hopeful...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Supreme Court Sidesteps America's Patent Eligibility Crisis

In an order that is clearly less impactful and damaging than a number of opinions that the Supreme Court has disgorged in the last two weeks, the justices have denied certiorari in American Axle & Mfg. Inc. v. Neapco Holdings...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Supreme Court Refuses (Again) to Jump Back into the 101 Fray

As we’ve written about multiple times, a petition for certiorari from the Federal Circuit’s starkly divided decision in American Axle has been pending at the Supreme Court for some time.  Many thought this would be the case...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Denies Cert in American Axle

In a month where the Supreme Court's conservative majority has exercised its judicial muscle by striking down several well-established precedents, one portion of their jurisprudence is as fixed a constant as the Northern...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Supreme Court Denies Review in American Axle

This morning, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in the closely-watched patent eligibility case of American Axle v. Neapco. There were no noted dissents and no statements respecting the denial of certiorari. The denial means...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

United States Calls for Supreme Court to Deny Petition for Certiorari Challenging Fintiv Factors

On Oct. 28, 2021, the Solicitor General filed a brief in opposition to Apple’s petition for a writ of certiorari in Apple Inc. v. Optis Cellular Tech., LLC et al. (No. 21-118). The government argued that the Federal Circuit...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Supreme Court Hammers Final Nail in the IP Bridge v. TCL Coffin

On Monday, the Supreme Court denied TCL Communication’s certiorari petition, without comment, appealing the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the essentiality of a patent claim is a question for the jury rather than judges to...more

Haug Partners LLP

Can Biopharma Functional Genus Patent Claims Be Resuscitated?

Haug Partners LLP on

An en banc rehearing petition to the Federal Circuit seeks to breathe life back into the widespread practice of patenting a genus of compounds by claiming their common functional characteristics. This claiming practice was...more

Haug Partners LLP

Standing to Appeal Post-Grant Proceedings: A Brief Review of Recent Federal Circuit Opinions

Haug Partners LLP on

On April 7, 2021, the Federal Circuit decided Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., where it held that Apple lacked standing to appeal the final written decisions in two inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings before the U.S. Patent...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions: Security People, Inc. v. Iancu, 971 F.3d 1355...

Security People lost an inter partes review (IPR) and appealed to the Federal Circuit. It lost that appeal and was denied certiorari at the Supreme Court. Security People never raised constitutional arguments in any of these...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions

[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more

Haug Partners LLP

Security People, Inc. v. Iancu, 2019-2118, 2020 WL 4873762 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 20, 2020)

Haug Partners LLP on

In an appeal from the Northern District of California, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Security People’s Administrative Procedure Act (APA) suit challenging the constitutionality of inter partes...more

Snell & Wilmer

Vibrations at the Federal Circuit: American Axle and the “New” “Nothing More” Test of Patent Subject Matter Eligibility

Snell & Wilmer on

The Federal Circuit’s recent decisions in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC have not clarified the standard for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (see a previous analysis of § 101’s...more

Jones Day

SCOTUS Says “Fresenius/Simmons Preclusion Principle” Stays Alive

Jones Day on

The Supreme Court recently denied Chrimar Systems, Inc. (Chrimar)’s petition for certiorari seeking to overturn the Federal Circuit’s “Fresenius/Simmons preclusion principle,” under which Chrimar’s district court victory...more

Goodwin

Issue Twenty-Eight: PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Denies Another Certiorari Petition on Doctrine of Equivalents

The Federal Circuit during 2019 and 2020 has issued a spate of decisions on the proper application of the Doctrine of Equivalents (see, e.g., UCB, Inc. v. Watson Laboratories Inc. and Galderma Laboratories, L.P. v. Amneal...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in Actavis Laboratories v. Nalproprion Pharmaceuticals

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

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - May 2020: Supreme Court – Decided and Pending Constitutional Challenges

Most readers have been following the impact of the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex and know that an earlier and less developed Arthrex I case is on cert to the Supreme Court asking the Court to address the appointments...more

Fish & Richardson

Section 101: Cert. Denied … Now What?

Fish & Richardson on

Since the Supreme Court’s decisions in Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012) and Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), lower courts and the United States Patent and...more

32 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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