4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Luv N’ Care, Ltd. and Nouri E. Hakim v. Lindsey Laurain and Eazy-PZ, LLC, Nos. 2022-1905, 2022-1970 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2024) addressed several issues, including: (1) what evidence of litigation misconduct may support a...more
Properly pleading inequitable conduct claims is a challenge, a challenge that can be met with early due diligence and attention to detail in your pleading....more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Luv N’ Care v. Laurain (April 12, 2024) addresses the legal standards for remedying egregious forms of deceptive conduct by patent owners through the equitable barring of relief and patent...more
In an action involving manufacturers of a self-sealing dining mat for toddlers, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that the defendants were barred from obtaining relief on...more
Last week in Luv n’ Care, Ltd. v. Laurain, the Federal Circuit put the lower court in time out and probably made Eazy-PZ, LLC (EZPZ) cry just a little bit harder. In this precedential decision involving U.S. Patent No....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that the asserted patents were not unenforceable for inequitable conduct, determining that statements made by counsel to the US Patent &...more
Patent prosecution costs can weigh heavily on cash-strapped clients, who may still face USPTO rejections after spending significant money. Unfortunately (and often), cash-strapped clients are not responsive. And to be fair,...more
Kilpatrick’s Alton Absher and Andie Anderson recently presented “Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation” at the firm’s annual 2024 Advanced Patent Law Seminar. This full-day seminar featured discussions...more
Expert report deadlines are a feature of every patent case's scheduling order, but they nevertheless are the constant source of disputes. For example, battles over whether to have two or three or four rounds of expert reports...more
The Patent Trial & Appeal Board of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) canceled all challenged claims across five patents because the patent owner failed to meet its duty of candor by selectively and improperly withholding...more
Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal No. 2021-1981 (Fed. Cir. May 9, 2023) In our Case of the Week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit considered the “analogous art” inquiry in...more
In 2018, United Cannabis Corporation (“UCANN”) sued Pure Hemp Collective (“Pure Hemp”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,730,911 (the “‘911 patent”), entitled “Cannabis Extracts and Methods of Preparing and Using the...more
Addressing a multitude of issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling dismissing infringement of one patent and finding a trade dress invalid but reversed the invalidation of...more
Mosaic Brands, Inc. v. Ridge Wallet LLC, Appeal Nos. 2022-1001, -1002 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 20, 2022) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit discussed the corroboration requirement concerning the amount of evidence...more
In California Costume Collections, Inc v. Pandaloon, LLC, 2-21-cv-01323 (CDCA Apr. 7, 2022) (John W. Holcomb), the Central District of California recently considered whether a plaintiff plead an inequitable conduct claim with...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board heard oral argument under 37 C.F.R. § 41.124(c) on February 4th in the Priority Phase of Interference No. 106,115 between the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively,...more
We have previously reported on AbbVie’s first and second wave suits against Alvotech hf (Alvotech) in the Northern District of Illinois regarding an adalimumab biosimilar. In the first wave suit, on October 5, 2021 AbbVie...more
An enduring and persistent (albeit until now unresolved) issue in the patent interferences involving the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") as Senior Party and the University of...more
In a second visit to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, after the Court affirmed a finding of unenforceability due to inequitable conduct based on “bad faith” non-disclosure of statutory bar prior sales on the...more
After a couple of weeks with lots of precedential decisions, the Federal Circuit caught its breath last week and issued only non-precedential ones (with the possible exception of a sealed opinion that may or may not be...more
ENERGY HEATING, LLC v. HEAT ON-THE-FLY, LLC - Before Moore, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota. Summary: Enforcing a patent with knowledge that it is invalid can...more
Arguments to the Patent Office That Contradict Information Submitted to the FDA Support an Inference of Deceptive Intent In Belcher Pharmaceuticals v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal No. 20-1799, the Federal Circuit held that a...more
Inequitable conduct is an affirmative defense to patent infringement, but the bar for proving it is a high one. A defendant must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the patentee intentionally deceived the Patent...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found prior art submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), yet withheld from the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) during prosecution of an asserted patent,...more
Imposition of liability under the equitable doctrine of inequitable conduct (as it has been variously defined) can result in a patent being held unenforceable; for this reason, former Chief Judge Rader called it the "atomic...more