Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
The Briefing: A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Podcast: The Briefing - A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Stages of Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - LKQ CORPORATION v. GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC [OPINION] (2021-2348, 5/21/24) Moore, Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, Stoll, and Stark - Stoll,...more
Case Name: Vanda Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Civ. No. 18-651-CFC, 2022 WL 17593282 (Dec. 13, 2022) (Connolly, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Hetlioz® (tasimelteon); U.S. Patents Nos. RE46,604 (“the ’604...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
On February 4, 2022, the Federal Circuit clarified that IPR estoppel extends to all claims and invalidity grounds that the petitioner could have reasonably asserted in its IPR petition. ...more
On January 10, 2022, U.S. District Court Judge Paul G. Gardephe (S.D.N.Y.) granted Plaintiff Bytemark, Inc’s (“Bytemark”) motion for leave to file a third amended complaint, asserting two new patents after the prior...more
Last week, Mintz Member Lisa Adams moderated a panel discussion between in-house attorneys that covered best practices for conducting patent clearances and obtaining non-infringement and invalidity opinions. The panel...more
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in HIP, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corp. et al., Civil Action No. 18-1615-CFC (D.Del. June 24, 2019), the Court granted Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment of...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Moore, Linn, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A prior art reference does not inherently disclose the elements of a claim...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, Dyk, and Chen. Appeal from the District of Colorado. Summary: (1) The Federal Circuit’s separate affirmance of a PTAB decision that a patent in suit is invalid renders an...more
The therapeutic methods exclusion is often problematic to navigate. In T 0699/12, the Technical Board of Appeal (TBA) of the European Patent Office (EPO) has provided some useful guidance on its application. In an...more
On May 1st, the Federal Circuit ruled that the America Invents Act (AIA) did not change the statutory meaning of “on sale” where the existence of a sale was publicly announced prior to patenting, even if the sale did not...more
The disputed technology relates to ethinyl estradiol and etonogestral vaginal ring used for contraception. The bench trial took place from January 19 through 22, 2016. The asserted claims are not invalid due to anticipation....more
Janssen’s suit against Celltrion in the District of Massachusetts (C.A. No. 1:15-cv-10698) is one of the few currently pending litigations related to biosimilars and the BPCIA. To date, the litigation has focused on three...more
Federal Circuit Construes Claim Term in a Manner that Rendered Claim Language Superfluous - In SimpleAir, Inc. v. Sony Ericsson Mobile Commc’ns AB, Appeal No. 2015-1251, the Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s...more
On March 30, 2016, District Court Judge Joseph F. Bianco granted defendant Twitter Inc.’s (“Twitter”) motions for summary judgment of invalidity and non-infringement against plaintiff EasyWeb Innovations, LLC (“EasyWeb”),...more
A 10-day trial took place beginning January 26, 2015 resulting in a finding of infringement, no invalidity and an $8 million damages award. Two of the three patents-in-suit were held invalid after trial due to unpatentable...more
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is denied. This is a declaratory judgment action on non-infringement and invalidity of the patent-in-suit. Defendant is an NPE. It had...more
The disputed patent describes a method and system for processing payments for remotely purchased goods. Defendant claims the patent is invalid because the claims at issue embody the abstract idea of paying for remote orders...more
This ANDA case concerns generic versions of bortezomib, marketed as Velcade® and used to treat multiple myeloma and mantle cell lymphoma. One prior art patent identifies bortezomib as a potent anti-cancer drug. The parties...more
Defendant claims the patent-in-suit claims ineligible subject matter and is therefore invalid under § 101. The invention uses computer technology for promotional gaming methods. Applying the 2-step Alice step, The court...more
Whether or not a prior art reference constitutes “analogous art” for purposes of an obviousness inquiry under 35 U.S.C. § 103 has been the subject of debate in many instances. On July 28, 2015, the Federal Circuit, in Circuit...more
Nunc Pro Tunc Assignments Insufficient To Confer Retroactive Standing - In ALPS SOUTH, LLC v. OHIO WILLOW WOOD CO., Appeal Nos. 2013-1452, 2013-1488, 2014-1147, and 2014-1426, the Federal Circuit reversed the denial of a...more
On May 26, 2015, the Supreme Court held in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Sys, Inc. that a defendant’s good-faith belief in the invalidity of the patent-in-suit is not a defense to induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b)....more