News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Patents

Jury Verdict Overturned in Pepcid® Dispute After Court Finds Insufficient Evidence of Infringement

Last year, a jury awarded Brigham and Women’s Hospital (“BWH”) approximately $10 million after it found that defendant Perrigo Company’s (“Perrigo”) generic version of Pepcid® Complete® willfully infringed BWH’s patent. After...more

SAS Institute Argues Before Supreme Court Against PTAB’s Partial-Decision Practice

by Jones Day on

In a closely followed case before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of SAS Institute Inc., a cross-office, cross-practice Jones Day team has challenged the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) practice to elect to institute...more

Centuries of Precedent are Little Help as IPR Constitutionality Divides Justices

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

This morning the Supreme Court heard arguments in the heavily anticipated case of Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC on the question of whether AIA trials at the patent office, such as inter partes...more

District Courts Split on Admissibility of Patent Owner IPR Victories

by Jones Day on

In an opinion dated October 12, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granted a motion in limine to exclude evidence that a challenged patent had survived twenty post-issuance proceedings,...more

Oil States Energy and SAS Institute: SCOTUS to Review Inter Partes Reviews

by Revision Legal on

As we recently discussed with respect to the proposed STRONGER Patents Act of 2017, legal debate continues to swirl around inter partes reviews. The US Supreme Court has entered the ring recently by accepting certiorari on...more

With Sovereign Immunity, the McCaskill Bill, and Oil States, Big Changes Might Be in Store for Inter Partes Review

When the American Invents Act was passed in 2011, most of us saw the inter partes review process as a streamlined, relatively inexpensive procedure that would permit accused infringers, especially those accused by...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In Merck v. Hospira, the only precedential case decided this week, a majority of the panel affirms a determination of obviousness, noting that despite the objective indicia supporting patentability, the claimed process was...more

USPTO and EPO Examiners Discuss Key Considerations for Filing Effective Precision Medicine and Bioinformatics Applications in the...

At a symposium and webinar presented by Fenwick & West and Mewburn Ellis, we asked U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and European Patent Office examiners to provide perspective on the preparation and prosecution of patent...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies the Requirements for a Teaching Away by the Prior Art

In a precedential opinion issued on October 11, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeals Board’s (“PTAB”) finding of non-obviousness where the prior art taught...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

The Circuit affirms the decision in Secured Mail v. Universal to dismiss an infringement case under Rule 12(b)(6), holding that all of the asserted claims of the seven patents are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter....more

The PTAB Authorizes Additional Motion To Amend Briefing in View of Aqua Products

by Knobbe Martens on

The Board authorized petitioner Kingston to file a Response to the patent owner’s Reply to petitioner’s Opposition to Motion to Amend, based on the Federal Circuit’s en banc holding that the burden to establish...more

It May Have Just Gotten a Little Easier to Amend Claims in an IPR

A Factionated Federal Circuit Holds that Petitioner has the Burden to Show Unpatenability - In Aqua Products, Inc., v. Matal, [2015-1177] (October 4, 2017), a plurality of the Federal Circuit en banc held that §316(e)...more

Federal Circuit Places The Burden Of Persuasion For Motions To Amend In IPRs On Petitioners

by Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit issued an en banc decision instructing the PTAB to assess patentability of amended claims in IPR proceedings without placing the burden of persuasion on the patent owner. Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, No....more

Petitioners Bear Burden Of Proving Claims Amended During IPR Unpatentable . . . For Now

by Jones Day on

In yesterday’s decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, No. 15-1177 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 4, 2017) (en banc), the Federal Circuit issued five opinions, spanning 148 pages, addressing the question of who bears the burden of proving...more

In IPRs, Petitioner Must Show Claim Amendments Unpatentable

by Morgan Lewis on

A recent Federal Circuit ruling shifts the burden to petitioners, which will likely lead to patent owners filing more motions to amend....more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In Allied v. OSMI, the Circuit affirms dismissal of a declaratory judgment action even though Allied’s Mexican distributors had been sued in Mexico on a corresponding Mexican patent. In a first Waymo v. Uber case, the panel...more

Not Every Instance of an Agency Reaching Inconsistent Outcomes in Similar, Related Cases will Necessarily be Erroneous

In Vicor Corp. v. Synqor, Inc., [2016-2283] (August 30, 2017) the Federal Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded the Board’s decisions in two reexaminations, one in which the Board found that certain claims...more

Considering the Human Elements in IP Litigation

by Womble Bond Dickinson on

At the heart of intellectual property litigation are people: People who are disputing the uniqueness and similarities of products and trademarks. The dispute is resolved through the decisions made by judges, arbiters, and...more

Federal Circuit Concurring Opinion Asks Whether the Exception To One-Year Time Bar For Filing Inter Partes Review Petitions Via...

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co., No. 2016-2321 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 22, 2017), a concurring opinion by Judges Dyk and Wallach questioned whether petitioners may use joinder to circumvent time bar...more

Gilead prevails in SOVALDI appeal

by Smart & Biggar on

The Federal Court of Appeal recently affirmed a trial decision relating to two competing patents over Gilead’s SOVALDI (sofosbuvir). In the trial decision, as previously reported, the Court declared Idenix’s Patent No....more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

This was a busy week for precedential cases at the Circuit. In AIA v. Avid, the Circuit rules that there is no right to a jury trial as to requests for attorney fees under § 285. In Romag v. Fossil, a majority rules that the...more

Interplay Between “Technological Invention” and “Significantly More” in PTAB CBM Review

by Knobbe Martens on

On July 18, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) instituted a covered business method (“CBM”) patent review for U.S. Patent No. 8,955,029 (“the ’029 patent”) on grounds of...more

10 Questions You Always Wanted to Ask About Patent Litigation in Germany

by Reed Smith on

With the proposed European patent litigation system now stalled for at least the near future, a key question for U.S. life sciences companies in their European patent litigation strategy will continue to be in which countries...more

No Stay of Remedial Orders Even After PTAB Finds Claims Unpatentable

by Jones Day on

The ITC has dealt a significant blow to the use of Inter Partes Review as a defense to a Section 337 investigation. In an order issued this week, the Commission denied a request to stay remedial orders that are currently on...more

Rx IP Update - July 2017

by Smart & Biggar on

Supreme Court of Canada strikes down "promise doctrine", upholds AstraZeneca’s NEXIUM patent as useful - As previously reported, on June 30, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada granted AstraZeneca’s appeal in the NEXIUM...more

98 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
Cybersecurity

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.