Amarin sells the drug icosapent ethyl under the brand name Vascepa. Vascepa is approved by the FDA for two indications: (i) to treat severe hypertriglyceridemia, a condition characterized by blood triglyceride levels greater...more
2023 saw a return to business as usual for the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments are once again in-person and open to the public, and the Court has resumed its former practice of holding occasional sittings outside of...more
2/9/2024
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Amgen v Sanofi ,
Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
Copyright ,
Design Patent ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
IP License ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
Proposed Rules ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Application ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Ownership ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
Cellect owned four patents with claims that were found unpatentable by the PTAB in ex parte reexaminations for obviousness-type double patenting. The patents were granted Patent Term Adjustment (“PTA”) for the Office’s delay...more
1/25/2024
/ Appeals ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Term Adjustment ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review
Directors Michael Joffre, Ph.D., William H. Milliken, Anna G. Phillips, and Richard A. Crudo will present the webinar "Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions" on Tuesday, January 23, 2024, at 1:00 p.m....more
1/19/2024
/ Appellate Courts ,
Claim Construction ,
Continuing Legal Education ,
Design Patent ,
En Banc Review ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Term Adjustment ,
Patents ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Webinars
This morning, the US Supreme Court issued its opinion in Amgen v. Sanofi, a closely watched case concerning patent law’s enablement requirement. Under that requirement, codified at 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), a patent specification...more
5/19/2023
/ Amgen ,
Biotechnology ,
Enablement Inquiries ,
Healthcare ,
Inventions ,
Judicial Proceedings ,
Life Sciences ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Sanofi ,
SCOTUS
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
In conjunction with the release of the firm's year-in-review report, speakers will offer case summaries and analysis of the significant 2022 appellate rulings discussed in the report. Topics of the featured intellectual...more
1/23/2023
/ Consent Order ,
Continuing Legal Education ,
Estoppel ,
Expert Testimony ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Prior Art ,
Standing ,
Webinars
Facebook filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition against claims 1–8 of Uniloc 2017 LLC’s patent on Voice over Internet Protocol. Meanwhile, an IPR proceeding was already pending on claims 1–6 and 8 of the same patent,...more
2/23/2022
/ § 314(d) ,
35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) ,
Appeals ,
Estoppel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Substantial Evidence
The inventor of a patent assigned to Hologic subsequently founded Minerva Surgical. Hologic then filed a continuation with broader claims. Based on that broader patent, Hologic brought an infringement case against Minerva,...more
Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no exception. It briefly returned to live...more
2/10/2022
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
America Invents Act ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Design Patent ,
Estoppel ,
Forum Selection ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Intervening Acts ,
Minerva Surgical Inc. v Hologic Inc. ,
Nonobvious ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Printed Publications ,
Rule 36 ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski]
Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
2/9/2022
/ § 314(d) ,
35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) ,
Absolute Intervening Rights Doctrine ,
Abuse of Discretion ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Administrative Procedure Act ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arbitrary and Capricious ,
Article of Manufacture ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Burden of Proof ,
Claim Construction ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Commercial Success ,
Confidential Information ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Demand Letter ,
Denial of Institution ,
Design Patent ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Dismissals ,
Doctrine of Prosecution Disclaimer ,
Due Process ,
Equitable Estoppel ,
Estoppel ,
Evidence ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Federal Rules of Evidence ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Forum Selection ,
FRCP 52(c) ,
GATT ,
Inferior Officers ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Reexamination ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Intervening Acts ,
Inventions ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Judicial Review ,
Lack of Authority ,
Lack of Jurisdiction ,
Likelihood of Success ,
Minerva Surgical Inc. v Hologic Inc. ,
Motion for Summary Judgment ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Nexus ,
Non-Disclosure Agreement ,
Nonobvious ,
Obviousness ,
Ornamental Design ,
Parallel Proceedings ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Filings ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Petition for Writ of Certiorari ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Pre-GATT ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
Principle Officers ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Rule 36 ,
Scope of Review ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 325(d) ,
Sua Sponte ,
Substantial Evidence ,
Totality of Evidence ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO ,
Vacated ,
Writ of Mandamus
When oral arguments commence in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., No. 19-1434 (U.S.) on Monday, March 1, William H. Milliken, a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group, will be live tweeting updates from...more
2/26/2021
/ 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a) ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Inferior Officers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Polaris Innovations Ltd v Kingston Technology Co ,
Principle Officers ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Tenure ,
United States v Arthrex Inc
Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to largely continue its operations....more
2/3/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appeals ,
Certiorari ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Estoppel ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Real Party in Interest ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO ,
Waivers
Samsung successfully petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several of Papst’s patents, including U.S. Patent No. 9,189,437. Prior to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding the claims of the ’437 patent...more
These charts and graphs appear in the firm’s Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions report....
The steady decline in district court patent appeals that began in FY16 continued in FY19, while...more
In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed just over 650 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the highest number since the Court started to hear post-American Invents Act...more
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
2/28/2019
/ § 315(b) ,
Adverse Judgments ,
Appeals ,
Article III ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Burden of Proof ,
Burden-Shifting ,
Claim Construction ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Doctrine of Prosecution Disclaimer ,
Estoppel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Inventors ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Non-Practicing Entities ,
Obviousness ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Partial Institution ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Owner Preliminary Response ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Printed Publications ,
Prior Art ,
Private Property ,
Public Rights Doctrine ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Right to a Jury ,
Right To Appeal ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
Section 101 ,
Section 102 ,
Section 103 ,
Seventh Amendment ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Standing ,
Time-Barred Claims