In Maquet Cardiovascular LLC v. Abiomed Inc., 131 F.4th 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit addressed whether the prosecution history of one patent in a patent family can limit the scope of claims in a different patent...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s noninfringement determination, finding that the presence of a disclaimed compound in the accused product precluded infringement. Azurity Pharm., Inc....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a district court misconstrued claim terms based on a misapplication of the clear and unequivocal disavowal standard and vacated its noninfringement decision. Maquet...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a District Court decision by Federal Circuit Judge Dyk, sitting by designation, based on erroneous claim construction in Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc...more
In Linksmart Wireless Tech., LLC v. Caesars Entm’t Corp., Case No. 2:18-cv-00862-MMD-NJK (D. Nev. May 8, 2020) the Court addressed disputed claim terms in U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE46,459 (the “’459 Patent”), Linksmart had...more
In Sanofi v. Watson Labs., the Circuit affirms a determination of induced infringement of one patent and direct infringement of another, thus assuring Sanofi another 12 years of exclusivity as to its Multaq® atrial...more
In its opinion in Aylus Networks, Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit expanded the scope of prosecution disclaimer to statements made by a patent owner during Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings. The Court explained...more
Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more