In a precedential opinion issued on April 11, 2024 in Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc., Nos. 22-2153, 23-1952, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court for...more
4/26/2024
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
Applications ,
Carve Out Provisions ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Hatch-Waxman ,
Injunctions ,
Orange Book ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Prior Art
For companies that need to protect their valuable intellectual property, the choice between trade secret and patent protection can be a difficult one. There are benefits to either approach...more
On August 28, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in In re Cellect, Appeal No. 2022-1293, evaluated for the first time how statutorily authorized patent term adjustments interact with the judge-made...more
On August 24, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Volvo Penta of the Ams. LLC v. Brunswick Corp., Case No. 22-1765, vacated a Final Written Decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) holding...more
Advice that may have served House of Pain in their 1992 hit song, “Jump Around,” to “bring a shotgun” to battle likely does not translate well to plaintiffs in federal litigation contemplating bringing a “shotgun” pleading to...more
On May 19, 2023, the Supreme Court in Amgen v. Sanofi, No. 21-757, unanimously held that the claims of two Amgen patents, both directed to a genus of potentially millions of antibodies, are invalid because the patents failed...more
Last week, in Hip, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corporation, No. 2022-1696 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2023), the Federal Circuit reversed Delaware District Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly’s decision to add an unnamed inventor onto a patent for...more
On February 24, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc., v. Avadel CNS Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Case No. 23-1186, affirmed a decision from the District Court of Delaware directing...more
On January 9, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re Stingray IP Solutions, LLC, No. 23-102 granted a writ of mandamus, vacating a decision of the Eastern District Court of Texas which had...more
On October 5, 2022, U.S. Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne of the Eastern District of Texas recommended denying-in-part a motion for summary judgment of no willful infringement, holding that requisite knowledge of the asserted...more
On July 12, 2022, U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright of the Western District of Texas denied alleged infringer Lenovo’s motion to dismiss ACQIS’s willful and indirect infringement and enhanced damages claims, holding that...more
On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more
3/24/2022
/ Appeals ,
Bad Faith ,
CAFC ,
Cease and Desist ,
Declaratory Judgments ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Halo v Pulse ,
Interlocutory Appeals ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Willful Infringement
Last week, the Federal Circuit issued a decision holding that parties can contractually bargain away their rights to file petitions for Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“the Board”). This...more
On February 8, 2022, U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware granted the plaintiff’s motion to exclude defendant’s expert testimony for being “based on an...more
On January 18, 2022, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner of the Central District of California sided with the majority of divided district courts, dismissing claims of willful and induced infringement that based the...more
On November 5, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Celgene Corp. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 21-1154, affirmed a decision from the District Court of New Jersey dismissing a suit brought by...more
On September 28, 2021, in a precedential opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Nos. 2020-1685, -1704, clarified its decision from a prior appeal in the...more
Earlier this month in Lubby Holdings LLC et al. v. Chung, No. 2019-2286 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 1, 2021), the Federal Circuit overturned a damages award stemming from a finding of patent infringement because the plaintiff did not...more
After an inter partes review (“IPR”) is instituted, a patent owner may move to amend challenged claims to overcome the prior art. However, there are also alternative paths to amending claims over the prior art even after an...more
It is said that Andy Warhol painted the famous Campbell’s Soup Cans after an art gallery proprietor told him to paint “something you see every day and something that everybody would recognize.” While Mr. Warhol’s Campbell’s...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) regularly tracks statistics regarding administrative trials conducted under the processes created by the America Invents Act (“AIA”), which provide insight into recent trends...more
8/25/2021
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
America Invents Act ,
Biologics ,
BPCIA ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Orange Book ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Purple Book ,
USPTO
In inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the PTAB will often uphold the validity of dependent claims despite finding the independent claim invalid. Dependent claims recite additional limitations that must be separately...more
Expert declarations are an essential component of any patent owner’s effort to survive an instituted inter partes review (“IPR”). The Board relies heavily on expert testimony in order to evaluate and understand the technology...more
The Federal Circuit in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated handed down a decision on April 7, 2021 that provides guidance on the determination of standing for patent licensees who wish to contest the validity of a patent or...more
4/21/2021
/ Apple ,
Article III ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
IP License ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Qualcomm ,
Standing
As discussed in our previous post, one of the most critical tasks for Patent Owners during the Inter Partes Reviews (“IPR”) discovery period is deposing the Petitioner’s expert. Since IPR depositions are treated differently...more
4/15/2021
/ Cross Examination ,
Depositions ,
Discovery ,
Evidence ,
Expert Testimony ,
Expert Witness ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Witnesses