Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. FRESHUB, INC. v. AMAZON.COM, INC. [OPINION] (2022-1391, 2/26/2024) (Reyna, Taranto, and Chen) - Taranto, J. The Court affirmed the District Court’s decision 1)...more
The Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for October 2023 covers three decisions addressing the scope of the work-product and attorney-client privileges, limits on the use of a defendant’s use of its own patents during...more
The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado granted a motion in limine to preclude testimony from corporate executives about their “business understanding” regarding infringement because the defendant previously...more
On May 11, 2021, the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court of Delaware’s judgment that patents belonging to Pacific Biosciences of California (“PacBio”) were invalid for lack of enablement under 35 U.S.C. § 112. A...more
TECSEC, INC., v. ADOBE INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: Even if it would be objectively reasonable to view a defendant’s conduct as...more
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. v. Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 17-275-LPS-CJB (D.Del. February 27, 2020), the Court...more
The Southern District of New York has granted a motion in limine precluding evidence of Defendant’s failed inter partes review (IPR) petition. The parties to the lawsuit are in the business of manufacturing and selling...more
We reported earlier this week that the district court in Amgen v. Hospira denied Hospira’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement of its proposed biosimilar of Epogen®/Procrit® (epoetin alfa) and granted-in-part and...more
FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - Federal Circuit Grants Mandamus Disallowing Use of U.S. Discovery in Foreign Proceedings - The Federal Circuit has granted mandamus vacating a New Jersey district court’s order that allowed...more
DISTRICT COURT CASES - Eastern District of Virginia Grants Summary Judgment of Noninfringement to Adobe - On May 7, 2015, Judge Brinkema of the United States district court for the Eastern District of Virginia...more
1. Defendant may not refer to plaintiff as a “patent troll” or reference “woodshedding.” It may however present evidence that plaintiff does not practice the patents-in-suit since that is relevant to damages....more