News & Analysis as of

Patents Patent Litigation Disclosure Requirements

A&O Shearman

Navigating the UPC’s evidence minefield: when confidentiality issues clash with procedural deadlines

A&O Shearman on

In July 2024, the UPC Court of Appeal (CoA) clarified its procedural rules surrounding evidence preservation and confidentiality. It confirmed that the deadline for bringing an action on the merits only starts to run after...more

Jones Day

Provisionals’ Disclosures Must Fully Support an Issued Claim for Pre-AIA Priority

Jones Day on

The PTAB recently provided a pre-AIA priority analysis for reference patents in Roku, Inc. v. Anonymous Media Research Holdings, LLC, No. IPR2024-01057, Paper 10 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 10, 2025). This decision highlights the...more

Knobbe Martens

Inaction Can Lead To Argument Forfeiture on Appeal

Knobbe Martens on

ALIVECOR, INC. v. APPLE INC. Before Hughes, Linn, and Stark. Appeal from Patent Trial and Appeal Board - A party in a PTAB proceeding forfeits the ability to challenge an opposing party’s discovery obligation violation...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

Preserving Patent Rights: Impact of Public Use on Patenting

Amundsen Davis LLC on

For a business planning to market a product that incorporates an invention, having an enforceable patent to protect the invention is often desirable. Two recent federal circuit cases reiterate what many patent holders and...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB’s holding of Non-Obviousness of Standard Adopted 3G Technology

The recent decision by the Federal Circuit in Honeywell International Inc. v. 3G Licensing, S.A., issued on January 2, 2025, overturned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“the Board”) factual and legal holdings in the final...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Beyond the 100 Mile Rule: Court of Appeal Affirms District Court’s Power to Compel Attendance of Distant Witnesses and Unveil...

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

What is the range of a federal district court’s power to compel a nonparty’s attendance at a hearing? Every practicing litigator knows the answer—“within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly...more

Haug Partners LLP

Ordinary (Artificial) Intelligence in the Art

Haug Partners LLP on

Given their potential to revolutionize many aspects of legal practice and intellectual property, artificial intelligence (“AI”) tools have become a mainstay in the legal space. While AI has its benefits, it also carries...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Fixing Unintentional Duty of Disclosure and Candor Issues Through Supplemental Examination

A significant procedure for patent owners, Supplemental Examination, was established in the 2012 America Invents Act when Congress determined there should be a proceeding to turn events that in the past could lead to...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Navigating the Complexities of Litigation Funding Discovery

For those who have not had a chance to attend one of our CLE presentations on Litigation Funding Disclosure, this IAM article provides a glimpse of the complex landscape for defendants seeking discovery on litigation funding...more

Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, LLC

Amgen is Not the End of Chemical Innovation

Some chemical innovators have found the recent Supreme Court decision in Amgen v. Sanofi to suggest that chemical inventions will be subject to new and draconian disclosure standards going forward. A few have even suggested...more

McCarter & English, LLP

Patent Office Cancels Patents for Inadequate Voluntary Disclosure in IPRs

Inter partes reviews (IPRs) are litigation-like procedures held before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office that are used to challenge the validity of patents. Typically,...more

Haug Partners LLP

Disclosure of Third-Party Funding Documents in Patent Litigation: A Shift Towards Greater Transparency in Patent Ownership and...

Haug Partners LLP on

Third-party litigation financing (TPLF) is an arrangement by which plaintiffs finance litigation costs through a non-party, typically a private firm that obtain funds from other investors. The commercial goal for a funder is...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Federal Circuit Rejects Patentee’s Attempt to Skirt Local Patent Rules in Duplicative Litigation

On September 7, in Arendi S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics Inc., a Federal Circuit panel affirmed the District of Delaware’s decision dismissing a patent infringement action as duplicative of a co-pending, earlier-filed action. ...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Delaware Judge Enforces Patent Case Disclosure Requirements

Womble Bond Dickinson on

​​​​​​​The District of Delaware has recently instituted several requirements in patent cases, many in response to the overwhelming caseload in part due to a judicial vacancy. In addition to the specific patent standing orders...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Inventions Not Made Under Employment Agreement

McDermott Will & Emery on

Applying a “middle ground” standard of review, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision denying a company’s request for a declaratory judgment asking a former employee to assign...more

Burr & Forman

Northern District of California's Revised Patent Local Rules Require Early Disclosure of Damages Information

Burr & Forman on

Last month, the Northern District of California revised its Patent Local Rules by adding requirements for early disclosure of damages information. Because the Northern District of California has been a national driving force...more

Hogan Lovells

Show me the Money: New rules in Northern California call for early disclosure of damages in Patent Litigation

Hogan Lovells on

Recently, the District Court for the Northern District of California updated is Local Patent Rules.  Early disclosure of financial information regarding damages is one change that has attracted some attention. ...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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Federal Circuit Denies En Banc Petition in Amgen v. Sandoz

The Federal Circuit today denied the petitions for rehearing by the panel and rehearing by the en banc Court filed by both parties in Amgen v. Sandoz. Amgen had petitioned for rehearing on the panel's decision that the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Amgen v. Sandoz – Did the Federal Circuit Just Doom the New Biosimilar Approval Pathway?

Congress passed the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”) in 2009 in an effort to bring biosimilar drug products to market. The goal was for the BPCIA to mimic for biologic drugs the Hatch-Waxman statute...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Amgen v. Sandoz Update -- En Banc Rehearing Petitions Filed

On July 21, 2015, the Federal Circuit decided the Amgen v. Sandoz appeal in a case of first impression regarding the interpretation of the disclosure and notice provisions of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act...more

Mintz - ML Strategies

Biosimilars, the BPCIA, and Amgen v. Sandoz: The Federal Circuit’s First Attempt To Make Sense of “A Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery...

Mintz - ML Strategies on

On July 21, 2015, the Federal Circuit issued a key decision regarding the meaning of various provisions of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA). See Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Fed. Cir. Case No....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Federal Circuit Decides Amgen v. Sandoz (in an opinion that will make neither party happy)

In a seriously fractured decision, the Federal Circuit construed the provisions of the Biologics Price Control and Innovation Act (BPCIA) today in Amgen v. Sandoz. In doing so, the Court limited the information available to...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Therasense Revisited: In re Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litigation

In the United States, patent applicants and their counsel owe a duty of candor and good faith to the Patent Office. This duty is breached when the applicant or its counsel knowingly fails to disclose material prior art...more

24 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