News & Analysis as of

Intellectual Property Litigation Supreme Court of the United States Patent Litigation

McDermott Will & Emery

Interesting Delay: Prejudgment Interest Accrues Despite Unreasonable Delay

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a decision on enhanced damages and prejudgment interest, concluding that the district court correctly applied the appropriate standard for enhanced damages in accordance...more

Smart & Biggar

When patents expire but royalty payments don’t: contrasting U.S. and Canadian approaches to patent licensing

Smart & Biggar on

How does the expiration of the patents in one jurisdiction impact global royalty payments? This question was addressed by the United States Court of Appeal’s Ninth Circuit in C.R. Bard Inc v Atrium Medical Corporation, Case...more

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

Section 337 Now Viable for “Mere Importers” After Federal Circuit’s Lashify Decision

For years, the U.S. International Trade Commission maintained that the potent remedies available under Section 337 were unavailable to intellectual property owners considered to be nothing more than “mere importers.” That...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

EDTX's Resurgence as the Top Patent Hot Spot

Judge Mazzant’s case assignment order on March 3, 2025, brought the topic of the Eastern District of Texas (“EDTX”) being the busiest forum for patent cases back into the spotlight...more

White & Case LLP

A Decade of FTC v. Actavis: The Reverse Payment Framework is Older, but Are Courts Wiser in Applying It

White & Case LLP on

In 2013, the United States Supreme Court significantly changed the landscape of patent settlements in the pharmaceutical industry with its FTC v. Actavis, Inc. decision. In Actavis, the Court held that certain types of...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, February 2024: Supreme Court Passes on Fintiv Challenge, Parallel IPR/District Court Litigation, First Precedential...

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: SCOTUS Won’t Hear Challenge to PTAB’s Fintiv Rule- The U.S. Supreme...more

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

Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions (8th Edition)

2023 saw a return to business as usual for the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments are once again in-person and open to the public, and the Court has resumed its former practice of holding occasional sittings outside of...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2023 #4

United Therapeutics Corporation v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-2217, 2023-1021 (Fed. Cir. July 24, 2023) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent case this week, the Court considered questions...more

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

MarkIt to Market® - May 2023

Thank you for reading the May 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we discuss Taco Bell's attempt to cancel two TACO TUESDAY trademark registrations, and a precedential TTAB decision...more

Cooley LLP

Supreme Court Affirmance in Amgen v. Sanofi Leaves Legal Standard for Patent Enablement Undisturbed

Cooley LLP on

The legal standard for enablement – the statutory requirement under 35 USC § 112 that a patent must enable those skilled in the art to “make and use” the claimed invention – remains unchanged after the US Supreme Court...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

SUPREME COURT RULING: Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi et al, May 18, 2023

Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi et al, No. 21-757 (S. Ct. May 18, 2023) The Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision today concerning the enablement requirement found in Section 112 of the Patent Act. Specifically, the...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Supreme Court Delivers the Final Blow to Amgen

The questions from the high court during oral argument at the end of March 2023 were fairly telling of the 9-0 ruling that came down yesterday in Amgen, Inc. v. Sanofi (No. 21-757). In fact, it did not come as much of a...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Previewing Generic’s Skinny Label: Supreme Court to Rule on Teva’s Certiorari Petition

Foley Hoag LLP on

The Supreme Court is expected to consider Teva’s pending petition for certiorari in the highly anticipated GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. on May 11, 2023, a case that could carry enormous implications for the...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[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

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - June 2020

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...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

Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Summer 2018

Fenwick & West LLP on

In This Issue - US Taxation of IP After Tax Reform - U.S. taxation of intellectual property has become astoundingly more complex after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The new rules are so complex that the IRS and Treasury...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

A Big Week for Intellectual Property: Supreme Court Decides Patent and Copyright Cases

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two opinions on intellectual property issues. On March 21, 2017, the Court decided in a 7-1 opinion that laches is no longer a valid defense to a claim of patent infringement occurring...more

Proskauer - New England IP Blog

Supreme Court Limits Foreign Reach of the U.S. Patent Act

The supply from the United States of a single component of an invention, for assembly of the invention abroad, is not patent infringement under Section 271(f)(1) of the Patent Act. This is according to a unanimous ruling this...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Implementation of Teva’s Hybrid Review Claim Construction - CSR PLC v. Azure Networks, LLC

Addressing the issue of de novo versus differential claim construction review post-Teva, the Supreme Court of the United States remanded back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit a case where de novo review...more

King & Spalding

ITC Section 337 Update - May 2015 #2

King & Spalding on

Federal Circuit Reverses Commission Determination Of Domestic Industry Economic Prong – On May 11, 2015, the Federal Circuit issued an Opinion in Lelo Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 2013-1582 (Fed. Cir. 2015), reversing the...more

Nossaman LLP

Good Faith Belief In Patent Invalidity Is No Defense To Claim Of Inducing Infringement

Nossaman LLP on

Commil, USA, LLC sued Cisco Systems, Inc. for patent infringement and inducing patent infringement with regard to Commil’s patented method of implementing short-range wireless networks. Today, in Commil, USA, LLC v. Cisco...more

Stinson LLP

Supreme Court Decision Eliminates Defense to Claim of Inducing Infringement

Stinson LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday, May 26 that a good-faith belief that a patent is invalid is not a defense to a claim of inducing infringement. Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 13-1986 (May 26, 2015). The Supreme...more

King & Spalding

The Supreme Court's Growing Intellectual Property Docket

King & Spalding on

In the closing decades of the twentieth century, the United States Supreme Court appeared to follow an informal policy of benign neglect toward the law of intellectual property. The Court entertained a case every few years...more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

De Novo Review of Claim Construction No Longer the De Facto Standard

On January 20, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, rejected the de novo review standard applied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit when reviewing all claim construction...more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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