News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States Teva v Sandoz

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
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

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

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

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

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

Dickinson Wright

Intellectual Property Legal News: Volume 2, Number 1

Dickinson Wright on

TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS: IS IT TIME TO RETHINK HOW YOU WILL ARGUE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION? The United States Supreme Court decided in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. that the Federal Circuit must review all...more

Winstead PC

Standard of Review for Claim Construction on Appeal

Winstead PC on

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court provided guidance on the standard of review for claim construction on appeal in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-854. The Court held “[w]hen reviewing a district...more

Weintraub Tobin

Supreme Court: Patent Claim Construction – Two Standards Of Review

Weintraub Tobin on

The Supreme Court recently decided a patent case involving a significant procedural issue. In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S.Ct. 831 (1/20/15), the question before the Court was whether the Federal...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - February 2015

Knobbe Martens on

More Deference to District Courts in Claim Construction - In TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. v. SANDOZ, INC., No. 13-854, the Supreme Court held that factual findings underpinning claim construction rulings are reviewed...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court: Claim Construction Is Subject to Hybrid Review - Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz, Inc.

In a 7–2 decision penned by Justice Breyer, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the de novo standard as the sole standard of review issues arising in claim construction. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz,...more

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

Practice Considerations Post Teva v. Sandoz

In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 13-854, slip op. 574 U.S. __ (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that underlying factual issues resolved while formally construing a disputed patent claim term at the...more

K&L Gates LLP

Teva and Its Potential Impact on Patent Litigation

K&L Gates LLP on

The Supreme Court recently handed down its 7-2 opinion in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. The case involved a Federal Circuit review of a district court’s determination that Teva’s patent claims were not...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Why Did the Supreme Court GVR the Shire Lialda Case?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On January 26, 2015, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated, and remanded Shire Development LLC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., to the Federal Circuit “for further consideration in light of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,...more

Williams Mullen

Supreme Court Cuts Out a Slice of the Federal Circuit’s De Novo Pie

Williams Mullen on

Recently, the Supreme Court changed the standard of review the Federal Circuit must use when reviewing district court claim construction decisions in patent cases. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S. ___...more

King & Spalding

The Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard for Reviewing Fact-finding in Claims Construction

King & Spalding on

On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision on the standard of review of factual findings by the trial court in construing patent claims. The Court ruled that factual findings in the context of...more

61 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