AI Washing: Simple Guidance to Avoid Risk
Tech Debt is Common. What does it mean for IPO readiness from a cybersecurity perspective?
Episode 332 -- Deep Dive into SEC’s Internal Controls and Cybersecurity Settlement with R&R Donnelly
Mitigating Political-Law Risk
The Preferred Return Podcast | AIFMD II – Implementation Begins
Why ESG Matters?
Meeting the Proposed SEC Climate Disclosure Requirements
California Regulation of Charitable Fundraising Platforms Part 2 - Reporting Due Diligence, Recordkeeping, and Disclosure Rules
ESG Masterclass — ESG and Impact Investing
The Justice Insiders Podcast - Human Beings: Cybersecurity's Most Fragile Attack Surface
JONES DAY TALKS®: Court Grants Stay on SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rule, but Companies Should Continue Preparations
ESG Masterclass — ESG and Politics
Ad Law Tool Kit Show – Episode 5 – Surviving an FTC Investigation
SEC’s New Cyber Rules for Publicly Traded Companies — The Consumer Finance Podcast
PLI's inSecurities Podcast - Commissioner Uyeda on “the Perils of Regulation by Theory and Hypothesis”
PLI's inSecurities Podcast - Addressing the “Netflix Problem” in Securities Regulation
What Nonprofit Leaders Need To Know About the Corporate Transparency Act
December 1st Deadline to Adopt Executive Compensation Clawback Policies — The Consumer Finance Podcast
How to Fix the Cyber Incident Reporting Mess--DHS Weighs In
ESG Essentials: What You Need To Know Now - Episode 16 - ESG Backlash
On December 1, 2023, Intelligent Wellhead Systems, Inc. (“Intelligent”) filed a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 11,401,779 (“the ’779 Patent”) (“IPR256”), assigned to Downing Wellhead Equipment,...more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released a Notice on the Federal Register (“the Notice”) today requesting public commentary and input on the current state of the experimental use exception. The USPTO is...more
The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is revolutionizing the way patents are enforced in Europe, and McDermott’s intellectual property team is here to help you navigate this dynamic landscape. Our Legal Lens on the Unified Patent...more
A recent decision by a San Francisco federal district court judge imperils the way many significant patent portfolios are developed. In Sonos v. Google, Judge William Alsup held that two patents asserted by Sonos against...more
On February 7, 2024, the Federal Court dismissed Takeda’s action under subsection 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations in relation to dexlansoprazole (Takeda’s DEXILANT). Justice Furlanetto...more
When construing the patent claims to determine patent infringement in China, the principle of equivalence will be applied, that is, the protection scope of a patent right is not only determined by the technical features...more
On September 7, in Arendi S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics Inc., a Federal Circuit panel affirmed the District of Delaware’s decision dismissing a patent infringement action as duplicative of a co-pending, earlier-filed action. ...more
In Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. (which you can read more about here), the Supreme Court held that 42 USC § 262(l)(9)(C) sets forth the exclusive federal remedy for failing to provide a copy of the biosimilar application to the...more
Last month, the Northern District of California revised its Patent Local Rules by adding requirements for early disclosure of damages information. Because the Northern District of California has been a national driving force...more
Recently, the District Court for the Northern District of California updated is Local Patent Rules. Early disclosure of financial information regarding damages is one change that has attracted some attention. ...more
Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more
The Federal Circuit today denied the petitions for rehearing by the panel and rehearing by the en banc Court filed by both parties in Amgen v. Sandoz. Amgen had petitioned for rehearing on the panel's decision that the...more
Congress passed the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”) in 2009 in an effort to bring biosimilar drug products to market. The goal was for the BPCIA to mimic for biologic drugs the Hatch-Waxman statute...more
On July 21, 2015, the Federal Circuit decided the Amgen v. Sandoz appeal in a case of first impression regarding the interpretation of the disclosure and notice provisions of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act...more
As businesses increasingly store and access confidential information in the cloud, questions arise as to how to safeguard a company’s private data once it becomes part of an external computing network. Standards for...more
On July 21, 2015, the Federal Circuit issued a key decision regarding the meaning of various provisions of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA). See Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Fed. Cir. Case No....more
In a seriously fractured decision, the Federal Circuit construed the provisions of the Biologics Price Control and Innovation Act (BPCIA) today in Amgen v. Sandoz. In doing so, the Court limited the information available to...more
The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) provides for a series of disclosures between a biosimilar applicant and the innovator company, commonly referred to as the “patent dance.” 42 U.S.C. §262(l). While...more