On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,127 (which...more
Dominating the entering gallery of the Impressionists exhibit at the Art Institute of Chicago is Georges Seurat's A Sunday on La Grande Jatte (see below). Painted in the pointillist style, the work comprises millions of...more
The Federal Circuit, and the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals before it, generally reviewed decisions by the Patent and Trademark Office under the same standard applied to district court decisions, whether the factual...more
On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,127 (which...more
In Becton, Dickinson & Co. v. Baxter Corp. Englewood, the Federal Circuit overturned a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review that claims in the challenged patent were not invalid for...more
The Supreme Court heard oral argument last week in Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. over the issue of assignor estoppel.
As a reminder, the case arose in an infringement suit over U.S. Patent Nos. 6,782,183 and...more
4/26/2021
/ America Invents Act ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Claim Construction ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
SCOTUS ,
Stare Decisis
Exactly two weeks after affirming a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rejecting claims for failure to satisfy the subject matter eligibility standard under 35 U.S.C. § 101,...more
On March 1st, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued its Order on the Preliminary Motions Lists submitted by Junior Party The Broad Institute, the Massachusetts Institute of...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict against Baxalta Inc., Baxalta US Inc., and Nektar Therapeutics for infringing Bayer Healthcare's patent to human blood clotting factor conjugates in Bayer Healthcare LLC...more
On March 1st, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued its Order on the Preliminary Motions Lists submitted by Junior Party University of California/Berkeley, University of Vienna, and...more
In a terse, non-precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's judgment that Defendants Torrent Pharmaceuticals and Indoco Remedies Ltd. had failed to prove that the claims asserted by...more
While much has been written about the effect of the post-grant review provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (2012) in invalidating U.S. patents, the change in the law most responsible for how easy it has become to...more
Stipulating to infringement after a contrary claim construction is a conventional stratagem for a losing party to have a final judgment that can be challenged before the Federal Circuit. The risk of course, is that if the...more
Trial courts tend to get more than the benefit of the doubt when their decisions are viewed under the "abuse of discretion" standard, and juries similarly are affirmed unless there isn't substantial evidence supporting their...more
12/7/2020
/ Abuse of Discretion ,
Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
Damages ,
JMOL ,
Judgment As A Matter Of Law ,
Motion For New Trial ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution History ,
Patents ,
Prior Art
Interferences were rendered unnecessary with the passage of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act in 2011, but they linger in disputes between patents and applications claiming priority to applications filed before the change...more
The Federal Circuit recently applied well-established principles of obviousness in affirming the Patent Trial and Appeals Board's invalidation of several patents related to antifungal formulations in Anacor Pharmaceuticals,...more
In the Supreme Court's recent clarifying campaign through the Federal Circuit's U.S. patent law jurisprudence, one section of the statute, 35 U.S.C. §112(a) has been noticeably left unscathed. Indeed, avoidance of this...more
6/1/2020
/ Claim Limitations ,
Denial of Certiorari ,
Expert Testimony ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Prior Art ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 112 ,
Statutory Requirements ,
Written Descriptions
On Monday, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) heard oral argument (remotely) from Senior Party the Broad Institute (and its partners as Senior Party, Harvard University and MIT) and Junior Party the University of...more
5/22/2020
/ CRISPR ,
DNA ,
Interference Proceeding ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Nonobvious ,
Obviousness ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art
On April 17th, CVC filed its Reply to Broad's Opposition (filed on April 9th) to CVC's Miscellaneous Motion No. 2 to Exclude Evidence filed (on April 2nd), in Interference No 106,155 between Senior Party The Broad Institute,...more
4/28/2020
/ Admissible Evidence ,
CRISPR ,
Cross Examination ,
Daubert Standards ,
DNA ,
Expert Witness ,
Hearsay ,
Interference Claims ,
Motion to Exclude ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petitioner Reply Briefs ,
Prior Art
On March 23rd, Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") filed its Reply to Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University...more
There are (at least) two ways of looking at the course of the Federal Circuit's evolving interpretation of the Supreme Court's subject matter eligibility jurisprudence under Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Labs.,...more
4/20/2020
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Appeals ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Dismissals ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Mayo v. Prometheus ,
Mobile Health Apps ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Section 101
The latest installment in the cat-and-mouse game of deciding priority in Interference No 106,155 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively,...more
4/18/2020
/ CRISPR ,
Cross Examination ,
Expert Testimony ,
Hearsay ,
Hearsay Exceptions ,
Inadmissible Evidence ,
Interference Claims ,
Life Sciences ,
Motion to Exclude ,
Objections ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art
The procedural niceties of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's implementation of the post-grant review features of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act continue to be explicated in the Federal Circuit (and of course, the...more
4/15/2020
/ Adidas ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
Appeals ,
Due Process ,
Motion to Amend ,
Nike ,
Notice and Comment ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Cancellation ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal
In what may be simple happenstance, the Federal Circuit issued opinions on the same day reversing a District Court grant of summary judgment in opinions written by Judge Lourie, here in BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Co....more
4/13/2020
/ Anticipation ,
Appeals ,
Exploitation ,
IP License ,
Obviousness ,
On-Sale Bar ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Public Use ,
Reversal ,
Section 102 ,
Summary Judgment
Summary judgment, while clearly advantageous, requires that there be no disputed question of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. When a district court grants judgment...more