Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | AI and Your Patent Management, Strategy & Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Hilary Preston, Vice Chair at Vinson & Elkins, Discusses Energy Innovation: Protecting Your Intellectual Property Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
(Podcast) The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
(Podcast) The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
A Conversation with Phil Hamzik
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
4 Tips for Protecting Your AI Products
Innovating with AI: Ensuring You Own Your Inventions
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
Welcome to the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, our new review of decisions and trends in the intellectual property arena. In this edition, we learn that advice is best coming from counsel, Texas claims...more
On Monday, June 13, 2022, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in Univ. of Mass. v. L’Oréal S.A. that signals a new trend in allowing a patentee the benefit of jurisdictional discovery prior to ruling on a foreign...more
APPLE INC. v. ZIPIT WIRELESS, INC. [OPINION]- PRECEDENTIAL - Before Hughes, Mayer and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: Notice letters and related...more
We have previously reported on AbbVie’s first and second wave suits against Alvotech hf (Alvotech) in the Northern District of Illinois regarding an adalimumab biosimilar. In the first wave suit, on October 5, 2021 AbbVie...more
On September 28, 2021, United States District Judge Edgardo Ramos (S.D.N.Y.) granted Defendant JLC Tech LLC’s (“JLC”) motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue. Judge Ramos also denied Plaintiff...more
Somewhat remarkably, there is no settled Federal Circuit precedent regarding where a patentee can bring suit against a generic competitor in Hatch-Waxman litigation under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2). While recognizing that this...more
Addressing personal jurisdiction in a declaratory judgment action, the US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit reversed the district court’s bench trial verdict, finding that the district court lacked specific personal...more
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Biomerieux, S.A. et al. v. Hologic, Inc. et al., Civil Action 18-21-LPS (D.Del. September 26, 2018), the Court denied the motion of defendant Grifols S.A....more
A Complaint Identifying Infringing Products and the Patents Allegedly Infringed, Accompanied by Statements that the Products Meet All Elements of at Least One Claim of the Asserted Patents, May be Sufficient to Meet the...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before PROST, WALLACH, and TARANTO. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), does not...more
This post summarizes some of the significant developments in the Eastern District of Texas and the Northern District of Texas for the month of November 2017. This post will focus on how the Eastern District of Texas continues...more
The Supreme Court’s decision five months ago in TC Heartland v. Kraft Food Group Brands was a sea change in the way courts interpret venue for patent infringement cases. Since the Federal Circuit’s decision in VE Holding...more
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is granted. The court finds that defendant has not sold a product, either directly or through a subsidiary, to a national reseller. Instead, it...more
180-Day Notice Period for Biosimilar Approval Is Always Mandatory and Enforceable by Injunction - Amgen Inc., v. Apotex Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2016) - A year after analyzing the patent dance and notice...more
The disputed technology relates to personal transporter devices. Defendant seeks to dismiss on the basis of lack of personal jurisdiction. The court denies the motion to dismiss, noting that the record demonstrates...more
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
Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e), filing an Abbreviated Biologics License Application (aBLA)—like filing an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA)— can be an act of patent infringement resulting in ‘artificial’ injury to a patentee....more
Plaintiff asserts jurisdiction under the stream-of-commerce theory. Defendants shipped approximately 2% of the accused products from their Indiana manufacturing facility to two customer distribution facilities in Delaware. ...more
In a 46-page order, Judge Timothy Batten denied a motion to dismiss under FRCP 12(b)(2) and (3) for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue, or in the alternative to transfer venue brought by OMsignal, Inc....more
A plaintiff in the District of New Hampshire recently found itself stuck in an unenviable and inescapable jurisdictional hole. Plaintiff Presby Patent Trust sued Infiltrator Systems, a Connecticut-based manufacturer and...more
On March 12, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana joined the District of Delaware and Eastern District of Texas as the first courts to consider a generic drug manufacturer’s motion to dismiss...more
Plaintiffs considering bringing suit in the District of Connecticut take heed: “Plaintiffs cannot vest a Connecticut court with personal jurisdiction over a person simply by hurling an accusation of patent infringement across...more
It is often to a patentee plaintiff's strategic advantage to file suit in the district in which it resides, to obtain whatever "home court" advantage may attach to that venue. Myriad's choice of filing its post-Supreme Court...more