Latest Posts › Patent Litigation

Share:

Large and Unjustified: Second Circuit Clarifies Pleading Requirements in Reverse Payments Cases

On May 13—and more than ten years after Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, the leading U.S. Supreme Court case on reverse payment settlements—the Second Circuit for the first time weighed in on whether (and how) antitrust...more

Patent Damages Procedural Fails Keep Coming

Last month I checked in on a discovery dispute regarding the timeliness of disclosing noninfringing alternatives (NIAs) in a case with only two rounds of expert reports. I noted that the problem (defendant waiting until the...more

The Pleading Standard for Complex Technology? It's Complex.

Can a patentee really just take a pass on alleging that an accused product meets a limitation in an asserted claim, even where the case involves complex technology? That's the upshot of the court's decision in Lindis Biotech,...more

Nokia and the Burden of Burdens

Much like secondary considerations, non-infringing alternatives fit imperfectly within many scheduling orders. The patentee has the burden of proof on damages, but it is the accused infringer who must prove that any...more

Puma and the Pitfalls of the “Narrow” Exclusive License

8 Puma Biotechnology is the latest victim of standing requirements in patent cases that continue to wreak havoc on plaintiffs’ ability to recover a full measure of damages. In Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca...more

CEMCO Can't Get What It Wants, But Probably What It Needs

Earlier this month, I previewed a Federal Circuit oral argument in In re: California Expanded Metal Products Co., No. 2023-1140, where the district court vacated a jury award of a 12 percent royalty and denied a motion for an...more

No Damages, No Injunction . . . and No Opposition?

The Federal Circuit will hear oral argument on March 5, 2024, in In re: California Expanded Metal Products, Co., No. 23-1140, a case that presents two intriguing issues regarding patent remedies. The first issue is the...more

Old Tricks/Bad Habits at the Federal Circuit

The Federal Circuit used to get a lot of flak for failing to defer to factual findings of the tribunal it was reviewing. My (highly unscientific) sense is that such criticism has eased somewhat, but I was reminded of it when...more

Doctrinal Lessons on the Doctrine of Equivalents

Judge Bryson's recent decision sitting by designation in Prolitec Inc. v. Scentair Technologies, LLC., No. 20-984-WCB, 2024 WL 341342 (D. Del. Jan. 30, 2024), provides two important reminders on the utility of an accused...more

The Federal Circuit Spins a Yarn

The Federal Circuit's decision on claim construction, Barrday, Inc. v. Lincoln Fabrics, Inc., 2023-1903, 2023 WL 7871688 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 16, 2023), takes a dizzy dive into the age-old question of when a claim should be...more

The Sewage of Expert Report Deadlines

Expert report deadlines are a feature of every patent case's scheduling order, but they nevertheless are the constant source of disputes. For example, battles over whether to have two or three or four rounds of expert reports...more

The Sneaky-Powerful Defense That Came Up Short - This Time

A great thing about patent litigation is the vast array of legal doctrines, arguments, and defenses that can come up in any given case. One example is the sneaky-powerful (precise legal term!) defense that a purported patent...more

Contentions & Expert Reports: A Match Made in [Someplace]

The interplay between contentions and expert reports in a patent case always requires considered judgment. The common sense rule that an expert may “expand on” but not “deviate from” a party's contentions is easy to say but...more

When Disclosure Isn't Disclosure

A patent challenger identified a witness as a person with relevant knowledge in Rule 26(a) disclosures and interrogatory responses, and the patentee deposed the witness. Surely the witness can testify at trial, right? The...more

A Tale of Two Experts

It was a tough day for opposing patent damages experts in Ecolab Inc. v. Dubois Chemicals, Inc., as Judge Andrews of the District of Delaware granted Daubert motions directed to both experts' reasonable royalty opinions. The...more

Panduit: A Test for All Seasons

8 The Panduit test for determining lost profits in a patent case is almost fifty years old. The four-factor test doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, but it has persevered. Therefore, it is always of interest anytime there's...more

The Supreme Court Hears Arguments About the Enablement Standard in Amgen v. Sanofi

The Supreme Court heard arguments this week in Amgen v. Sanofi, the closely-watched case involving the enablement standard for patent claims, particularly as applied to functionally-defined genus claims. The question raised...more

17 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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