News & Analysis as of

Teva v Sandoz

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Malvern Panalytical Inc. v. TA Instruments-Waters LLC (Fed. Cir. 2023)

One of the characteristics of patent infringement litigation in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's decision in Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. (holding that claim construction was a matter of law to be reviewed de...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

Proper construction of claim limitations reciting the chemical property of pH (which denotes the concentration of hydrogen ions in a solution as an indication of acidity) has arisen several times in district court and Federal...more

Holland & Knight LLP

A "Bitterly Divided" Federal Circuit Declines to Stay Decision Invalidating Car Driveshaft Patent

Holland & Knight LLP on

Despite one concurring judge's belief in a "fair probability" that the U.S. Supreme Court would grant certiorari and reverse an order invalidating American Axle's driveshaft patent for purportedly claiming natural law, the...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Judge Moore Renews Her Plea to the Supreme Court in American Axle

Fenwick & West LLP on

On October 23, 2020, a Federal Circuit panel issued a unanimous decision in American Axle & Manufacturing v. Neapco Holdings—a case we’ve discussed on this blog several times before—in which the panel denied American Axle’s...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Chief Judge Stark Enters Markman Ruling Construing Eight Terms In Dispute In Patent-In-Suit

Fox Rothschild LLP on

By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Enzo Life Sciences, Inc. v. Hologic Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 16-894-LPS-CJB (D.Del. October 15, 2018), the Court entered its Markman ruling...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Sandoz v. Teva: Supreme Court Nixes Post-Approval Waiting Period for Biosimilars

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: In its first opinion relating to the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), the Supreme Court in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. provided a win to biosimilar companies, eliminating the...more

K&L Gates LLP

Practical Implications from the Federal Circuit’s Rare en Banc Reversal in Apple v. Samsung

K&L Gates LLP on

In a precedential opinion issued en banc on Friday, October 7, 2016, the Federal Circuit overturned a panel decision, affirming and reinstating the district court’s judgment and the jury’s verdict. The majority opinion...more

WilmerHale

Binding Claim Construction Rulings Pre- Teva Vs. Post -Teva

WilmerHale on

In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that clear error review applies to factual determinations underlying district court claim constructions. There has been much discussion about the...more

Knobbe Martens

2015 IP Law Year In Review

Knobbe Martens on

Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1920 (May 26, 2015) - ..Does a defendant’s belief that a patent is invalid serve as a defense to charges of inducing infringement? NO - ..Inducement requires...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Top Stories of 2015: #6 to #10

After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its ninth annual list of top patent stories. For 2015, we identified twenty stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more

Fenwick & West LLP

New Patent Claim Construction Review Standard

Fenwick & West LLP on

In early 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court changed the standard of review for patent claim construction with its decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831 (2015) (Teva I). Previously, the U.S. Court of...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Court Finds Dow Claims Clearly Indefinite

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Dow Chemical Co. v. Nova Chemicals Corp., the Federal Circuit held claims reciting a limitation that could be calculated in several ways indefinite where the patent claims, specification, and prosecution history failed to...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Nautilus Standard Sinks Dow Patents

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) lost a ruling that competitor NOVA Chemical Corporation and NOVA Chemicals Inc. (collectively “NOVA”) infringed claims of two Dow patents when the Federal Circuit applied the U.S. Supreme Court’s...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Teva Review Standard Controls Lighting Ballast on Remand - Lighting Ballast Control LLC v. Philips Electronics North America Corp.

McDermott Will & Emery on

In yet another post-Teva claim construction case (see discussion of Teva v. Sandoz, Shire Development v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Grp. and TomTom, Inc. v. Adolph cases (this edition) the U.S....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Expert Testimony Not Always a Guarantee for Appellate Review with Deference - Shire Development v. Watson Pharmaceuticals; Teva...

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the impact of expert testimony used during claim construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a case remanded by the U.S. Supreme Court, following its January 5, 2015 decision in Teva...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc., 787 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2015) (Circuit Judges Prost, Chen, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Hughes, J.) (Appeal from S.D. Fla., Middlebrooks, J.) - Drug...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., v. Sandoz, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., v. Sandoz, Inc., Fed. Cir. Nos. 2012-1567, -1568, -1569, -1570, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10229 (Fed. Cir. June 18, 2015) (Circuit Judges Moore, Mayer, and Wallach presiding; Opinion by Moore,...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

No Rehearing En Banc for In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies -- PTAB Update

Earlier this week, the Federal Circuit issued an order denying a petition for rehearing en banc in the In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC case. As we have previously reported, this case was the first appeal of the first...more

Polsinelli

Teva Standard of Review Becomes Outcome-Determinative in Fed. Circuit Ruling Last Week

Polsinelli on

Earlier this year in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831 (2015), the Supreme Court changed the appellate standard of review for claim construction decisions. The Court held that while claim construction...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

First Round of Post-Teva Claim Construction Decisions: Business as Usual?

In its January 2015 decision, Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court held that the ultimate construction of a patent claim term is a question of law, subject to de novo appellate review, but that the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Federal Circuit Tackles Claim Construction Review under New Standard

The More Things Change (Lighting Ballast Control LLC v. Philips Electronics North America), the More They Stay the Same (Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.) - On June 18, 2015, the Federal Circuit handed down...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Fed Circuit Reverses PTAB Decision in IPR Proceeding

On June 16, the Federal Circuit issued its first-ever reversal of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision in an America Invents Act post-grant proceeding. The opinion, drafted by Chief Judge Prost and joined by CAFC Judge...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Implementation of Teva’s Hybrid Review Claim Construction - CSR PLC v. Azure Networks, LLC

Addressing the issue of de novo versus differential claim construction review post-Teva, the Supreme Court of the United States remanded back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit a case where de novo review...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Teva Pharms USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Teva Pharms USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 10-13-854, 135 S. Ct. 831 (Mar. 20, 2012) (Breyer, J. delivered opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C.J., and Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ.,...more

K&L Gates LLP

Where Do We Go from Here? Teva’s Impact on IPR and District Court Practice

K&L Gates LLP on

The recent Supreme Court case of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. held that, although the ultimate issue of claim construction is a legal question subject to de novo review, underlying factual determinations...more

75 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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