Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 262: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law and Motions for New Trial (Civ Pro)
The Briefing: Shedding Light on ‘Willful Blindness’: Brandy Melville v Redbubble
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - CYNTEC COMPANY, LTD. v. CHILISIN ELECTRONICS CORP., CHILISIN AMERICA LTD. [OPINION] (2022-1873, 10/16/23) (Moore, Stoll, Cunningham) - Stoll, J. The Court reversed the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s claim construction and jury instructions but reversed a premature judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) on obviousness and an imprecise damages award....more
Cyntec Company, Ltd. v. Chilisin Electronics Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1873 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 16, 2023) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a California district court’s judgment as a...more
The District Court for the District of Delaware recently held a patentee waived its right to seek JMOL on infringement following a jury verdict of non-infringement because the patentee’s Rule 50(a) motion focused solely on...more
Sanofi and Regeneron filed their brief at the Supreme Court in Amgen v. Sanofi, in which Amgen seeks to have the Court overturn the District Court's grant of JMOL in the issue of whether Amgen's claims were invalid for...more
The Supreme Court on Friday, Nov. 3, granted Amgen’s petition for certiorari on the second of the Questions Presented in its petition...more
Case Name: GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., 25 F.4th 949 (Fed. Cir. 2022) (Circuit Judges Moore, Newman, Dyk, Prost, O’Malley, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll presiding; Moore, Newman, O’Malley, Taranto,...more
U.S. patent law grants patent owners the right to grant licenses to their patents in analogy to landlords granting rents to real property as a license to use without obtaining ownership. 35 U.S.C. §§ 261-262. But the...more
In Lubby Holdings LLC v. Chung, the Federal Circuit held corporate officers and employees who actively assist with their corporation’s infringement may be personally liable for inducing infringement even without any piercing...more
The 2020 decision by a divided Federal Circuit panel in GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA regarding the extent to which an ANDA applicant who obtained regulatory approval under the Section viii carve-out...more
The Federal Circuit in Lubby Holdings v. Chung overturned a jury verdict finding that Lubby satisfied Sec. 287(a)’s requirement to notify Chung of his infringement. Was this reversible error, or has the court determined that...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s finding of liability for infringement that occurred prior to the filing of the action, explaining that notwithstanding the defendant’ admission that...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected an insufficiently developed claim construction challenge and found noninfringement where the patentee argued that a key feature shared by the accused device and the...more
Most judicial outcomes, particularly on appeal, are broadly based on varying combinations of process and outcome. The law is replete with process-based decisions (standing, jurisdiction, waiver, to name a few) and of course...more
The Federal Circuit continues its recent run of decisions extending the reach of the enablement requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) to invalidate patents in Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. v. Oxford Nanopore Technologies,...more
PACIFIC BIOSCIENCES OF CALIFORNIA v. OXFORD NANOPORE TECHNOLOGIES - Before Lourie, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Enablement is required for...more
Reference product sponsors often obtain patents claiming methods of using a known drug to treat a condition or disease. Because generic and biosimilar developers typically do not treat patients, and thus do not directly...more
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
In the recent case of Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s invalidation of certain of Amgen’s antibody patent claims, concluding that the claims were not “enable[d]” under 35...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict against Baxalta Inc., Baxalta US Inc., and Nektar Therapeutics for infringing Bayer Healthcare's patent to human blood clotting factor conjugates in Bayer Healthcare LLC...more
In a precedential opinion in Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC, et al., No. 20-1074 (Fed. Cir. 2021) issued on February 11, 2021, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the United States District Court for the...more
A little less than four years ago, the Federal Circuit rendered a decision in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi that brought clarity to how the Court (and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) should apply the written description requirement...more
Network-1 sued HP, among others, for patent infringement. Another defendant then filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition. Following institution, HP filed its own petition on different grounds and a motion to join the...more
Trial courts tend to get more than the benefit of the doubt when their decisions are viewed under the "abuse of discretion" standard, and juries similarly are affirmed unless there isn't substantial evidence supporting their...more
In Network-1 Technologies, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Company, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s holding that joinder petitioner Hewlett Packard (“HP”) (1) could have tried to raise new grounds in its...more