Patent law in Europe: What pharmaceutical companies need to know
Addressing for the first time the issue of whether bioequivalence data and in vitro testing can show that an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) product with different immediate and delayed release portions infringed on a...more
The doctrine of equivalents is a staple patent law principle, addressing the tension between providing fair protection to innovative ideas and ensuring legal certainty for third parties. However, like most patent laws, the...more
Mirror Worlds Technologies, LLC v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1600, -1709 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 4, 2024) In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Federal...more
On October 24, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a ruling in Nexstep, Inc. v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, affirming the District Court for the District of Delaware’s judgment of...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court determination that a patent owner had not provided the “particularized testimony and linking argument” required to demonstrate equivalence under the...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - NEXSTEP, INC. v. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC [OPINION] (2022-1815, 2022-2005, 2022-2113, 10/24/2024) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) - Chen, J. The Court affirmed the...more
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Ericsson AB, Ericsson, Inc. v. Lenovo (United States), Inc. et. al., Appeal No. 2024-1515 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 24, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit clarified that, for an...more
In Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple, the Federal Circuit expanded the preclusive effect of non-infringement rulings. It ruled that prior judgments of non-infringement can prevent follow-on lawsuits involving...more
In a joint appeal of two adverse decisions from the District Court, the Federal Circuit on procedural grounds rejected an appeal from the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation ("WARF") in Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more
Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1884, -1886 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2024) In its only precedential patent decision last week, the Federal Circuit brought to a close a long-running dispute...more
Before Prost, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. Summary: Literal infringement and infringement under the doctrine of equivalents are treated as the same...more
On August 28, 2024, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision regarding issue preclusion in Wisc. Alumni Research Found. v. Apple Inc., Nos. 2022-1884, 2022-1886. For issue preclusion to apply, “the issue actually...more
Hosted by C5 Group, the 17th Annual Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe returns for another exciting year with curated programming that will provide up-to-the-minute information and strategic insights on...more
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
After a jury found infringement of two patents and awarded almost $2.2 billion in damages, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the infringement finding for one asserted patent, vacated the damages award...more
Cell therapy products in the U.S. are estimated to be worth approximately $4.5 billion currently and expected to grow to over $30 billion in the next ten years. As market value increases litigation is bound to heat up....more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently struck down broad patent claims covering a “genus” of antibodies, reaffirming in a 9-0 decision that a patent must “enable” the full scope of its claims (Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi). Amgen, Inc.,...more
AR Design Innovations LLC v. Rove Concepts Ltd., Case no. 2:23cv310 (E.D. Texas, June 26, 2023) - Virtual and augmented reality technology increasingly is finding a place in a wide range of industries, and home...more
Some chemical innovators have found the recent Supreme Court decision in Amgen v. Sanofi to suggest that chemical inventions will be subject to new and draconian disclosure standards going forward. A few have even suggested...more
Recent case law highlights enablement and written description challenges for genus claims. Given the challenges of enforcing genus claims, the doctrine of equivalents (DOE) may become a more important tool for patentees when...more
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Amgen v. Sanofi puts a spotlight on enablement of functionally defined claims. Future developments may shed light on a number of remaining questions for patent applicants. Here are five...more
Power Probe Grp., Inc. v. Innova Electronics Corp., 21-cv-00332 (D. Nev. Apr. 27, 2023) While it is accepted that filing an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint rendering it without legal effect, a defendant...more
On March 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, a closely watched case on the issue of enablement under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). Though not the main point of contention, the doctrine of...more
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Amgen v. Sanofi yesterday in an extended session with arguments from the parties and the U.S. government. The Justices showed a great deal of interest, albeit with some difficulty,...more