Michele Moresco on the Transformational Potential of Photonics
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2025 and Look Ahead to 2026
Practical IP Lessons From the Field Part Two: Navigating IP Risk in Oil & Gas - Energy Law Insights
Practical IP Lessons From the Field Part One: Protecting Innovation in Oil & Gas - Energy Law Insights
USPTO Proposes New Rules to Limit Multiple Validity Challenges — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Unexpected Paths to IP Law with Jerry Hrycyszyn and Suresh Rav
Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Wolf Greenfield’s New Shareholders
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
Tonia Sayour in the Spotlight
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
In the first installment of patents and politics, we reported that the United States was potentially entering into an era of IP policy driven by President Trump’s America First rhetoric. In March, Mr. John Squires,...more
AGI SURETRACK LLC v. FARMERS EDGE INC. - Before Moore, Mayer, and Lourie. Appeal from the District of Nebraska. Patents claiming data collection, processing, and transmission using generic computer components are...more
The first quarter of 2026 saw several meaningful Section 337 decisions from the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”). These decisions addressed the domestic industry requirement, the impact of redesigned...more
The Supreme Court just handed generic manufacturers – and really, all patent defendants – a major win in Hikma v. Amarin, unanimously reversing the Federal Circuit and tightening the standard for induced infringement under §...more
The pharmaceutical industry has been watching Hikma Pharmaceutical USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. (No. 24-889) closely for its potentially sweeping implications for generic drug competition, as discussed in our prior posts –...more
Addressing patent eligibility and attorneys’ fees, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that five farming data patents were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter, but...more
In a decision that, in retrospect, is not surprising (in view of the haste with which the Court took up the case after granting certiorari; see “Solicitor General Proves Persuasive; Supreme Court Grants Hikma’s...more
On June 4, 2026, a unanimous Supreme Court in Hikma Pharms. USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., No. 24-889, clarified the standard for pleading induced patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). ...more
On June 3, 2026, Xbrane announced the resubmission of its aBLA for Xlucane (ranibizumab), a proposed biosimilar of Genentech’s Lucentis® (ranibizumab) after receiving a second Complete Response Letter (CRL) from the FDA in...more
On June 4, 2026 in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that materially recalibrates inducement analysis in the context of Section viii carve-outs....more
Background - In a precedential Director discretionary denial issued May 14, 2026, USPTO Director John A. Squires denied institution of inter partes review in Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. v. Kurin, Inc., holding that...more
The measurement of the hydrogen ion concentration in an aqueous solution is represented (on a logarithmic scale) as the pH, wherein water under ambient conditions (a temperature of 25°C) has a neutral pH of 7 and the solution...more
On June 4, in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Federal Circuit, holding that a complaint for induced infringement must “plausibly allege” that the generic drug...more
In Ollnova Technologies Ltd. v. ecobee Technologies ULC, the Federal Circuit handed Ollnova a string of doctrinal wins — three of its four patents cleared the patent eligibility hurdle under 35 U.S.C. § 101 — only to throw...more
On June 4, the Supreme Court unanimously decided Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. This case concerns the requirements for induced infringement, specifically in the context of “skinny labels” for generic...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has now issued its decision in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., unanimously reversing the Federal Circuit and narrowing the circumstances in which generic drug manufacturers may...more
On May 18, 2026, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, in a case before Judge Myong J. Joun, returned a verdict finding a global pharmaceutical company liable for approximately $885 million in...more
Patent enforcement has always required two decisions, not one. The first is the obvious question: can the patent owner prove infringement and survive the expected validity challenges? The second is the question that...more
On October 17, 2025, USPTO Director John Squires issued a memorandum announcing that he would be sole decision-maker for institution of inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR) proceedings....more
In Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. (June 4, 2026), a unanimous Supreme Court has further clarified what it takes to plead — and ultimately prove — that a defendant induced another party to infringe a...more
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma Inc., No. 24-889, that a branded pharmaceutical company alleging induced patent infringement against a generic manufacturer must plausibly...more
Key Takeaways: Induced infringement requires clear affirmative conduct. Actions required by law, standard industry practices and omissions do not count as “active steps.”...more
Key Takeaways - Leaving pH measurement conditions undefined let the court apply a default standard temperature, which defeated literal infringement...more
The Federal Circuit’s new precedential decision in Ollnova Technologies Ltd. v. ecobee Technologies ULC may have significant implications for how patent cases are tried, particularly in multi-patent disputes involving...more
On May 4, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Judges Lourie, Prost, and District Judge Burroughs) affirmed a decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas...more
