News & Analysis as of

Leave to Amend Patents

Smart & Biggar

Sandoz granted leave to add new allegations on condition of trial adjournment and extension of 24-month stay

Smart & Biggar on

In a decision rendered on August 17, 2022, the Federal Court granted Sandoz Canada Inc (Sandoz) leave to amend its Statement of Defence to add new allegations, contingent on an adjournment of the trial and an extension of a...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

What Took You So Long? District Court Denies Leave to Amend Patent Infringement Contentions Finding Plaintiff Didn’t Act...

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently denied a motion by Philips North America seeking leave of the Court to amend its claims of patent infringement against Fitbit to include several...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Celgene Corp. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021)

The question of the proper court for a branded pharmaceutical maker to bring suit against an Abbreviated New Drug Application filer under the Hatch-Waxman Act is surprisingly unsettled seeing as the Act was enacted in 1984. ...more

Saiber LLC

District of New Jersey Decision Helps Clarify Standards for Lifting Federal Litigation Stay Based on Concurrent PTAB Proceedings

Saiber LLC on

In a recent decision, Judge Brian R. Martinotti affirmed Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Arpert’s order denying plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend its complaint.  Plaintiffs were attempting to remove their patent infringement...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Court: Improved User Experience Doesn't Improve Computer Functionality Under Alice

Holland & Knight LLP on

In 2019, the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah dismissed Simio's lawsuit against FlexSim Software, finding that the asserted patent was ineligible under Section 101. Simio responded by asking the court to vacate...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2019

Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB Cannot Approve or Deny Certificates of Correction - In Honeywell International, Inc. v. Arkema Inc., Arkema France, Appeal Nos. 2018-1151, -1153, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) does not have the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Patent Owner Precluded from Asserting in Litigation Claims Obtained Through Ex Parte Reexamination

A district court has denied a request to amend patent infringement contentions to add claims obtained through ex parte reexamination after the case had been substantially narrowed through a parallel inter partes review (IPR)...more

Smart & Biggar

Eli Lilly granted leave to add new cause of action of direct infringement of "composition for use" claims, absent allegation of...

Smart & Biggar on

(Updated October 1, 2019) - On July 3, 2019, Eli Lilly was granted leave to amend its pleadings to introduce a new cause of action for direct infringement of claims relating to a new use without including an allegation of...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Stick to the Pleading when Deciding Motion to Dismiss

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a dismissal of a complaint for failing to state a claim under FRCP 12(b)(6), finding error in the district court’s use of judicial notice to do fact-finding outside the...more

Jones Day

District Court Extends IPR Estoppel To Non-Petitioned Invalidity Grounds

Jones Day on

Presidio Components, Inc. (“Presidio”) petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 6,144,547 (the “‘547 Patent”), which American Technical Ceramics Corp. and AVX Corporation (together “plaintiffs”) asserted...more

Knobbe Martens

Coda Development v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for N.D. Ohio. Summary: On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a district court cannot judicially notice facts that are subject to...more

Smart & Biggar

Abbott/Takeda permitted to plead that a third party’s patent would be infringed by alleged non-infringing alternative

Smart & Biggar on

On the eve of a section 8 trial, the Ontario Superior Court granted Abbott and Takeda leave to amend their pleadings to assert that Apotex’s purported non-infringing alternative (NIA) was unlawful as it would have infringed a...more

Smart & Biggar

Apotex not permitted to plead promise-based invalidity grounds in Ontario section 8 lansoprazole action

Smart & Biggar on

This motion arose in the context of a section 8 action in which Apotex claims damages for delay in the issuance of its notice of compliance for its generic lansoprazole product (Takeda's PREVACID), due to prohibition...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

Pair of Federal Circuit Decisions May Impact Early Section 101 Challenges in Patent Litigation

In the span of a week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated two district court rulings of patent invalidity under 35 U.S.C § 101. The first decision, Berkheimer v. HP Inc., vacated-in-part a grant of summary...more

Knobbe Martens

Aatrix Software, Inc v. Green Shades Software, Inc

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Moore, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Summary: Allegations in the complaint about how the claimed invention solved problems in...more

Smart & Biggar

Rx IP Update - December 2017

Smart & Biggar on

PMPRB News - PMPRB releases scoping paper relating to proposed amended Regulations - As previously reported, on December 2, 2017, Canada’s Governor-in-Council published proposed Regulations Amending the Patented...more

Jones Day

Respondents Denied Leave to Amend Answer to Complaint

Jones Day on

In Certain Digital Cable and Satellite Products, Set-Top Boxes, Gateways and components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1049, ALJ McNamara recently denied a motion by Respondents to amend their answer to the complaint to add the...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Judge Oetken Holds that Amendments Made During Ex Parte Reexamination Are not Effective Until Grant of Reissue Patent

On September 26, 2016, District Judge Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y.) denied defendant Jay Franco & Sons’ (“Franco”) motion to dismiss, granted plaintiff Infinity Headwear & Apparel’s (“Infinity”) motion for leave to amend to assert...more

McDermott Will & Emery

ANDA Update - October 2015

McDermott Will & Emery on

Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

19 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