News & Analysis as of

Patent Litigation Patent Infringement Claim Construction

Jones Day

PTAB Allows Three Concurrent IPR Petitions for Unusual Patent Claims

Jones Day on

Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) was persuaded to consider the merits of three out of seven concurrent petitions for an inter partes review of a single patent due to the patent’s complicated claiming...more

Knobbe Martens

Hard to Stomach: Things You Say to Prosecute a Patent Can and Will Be Used Against You

Knobbe Martens on

AZURITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD. Before Murphy, Moore, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Arguments and amendments made during prosecution of a parent...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Prolia® / Xgeva® (denosumab) / Jubbonti® / Wyost® (denosumab-bbdz) / Ospomyv™ / Xbryk™ (denosumab-dssb) / Stoboclo®...

Venable LLP on

Denosumab Challenged Claim Types in Litigation: Claims are counted in each litigation, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple litigations are counted more than once. Within each litigation a claim is counted...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Vacates Summary Judgement: Limitations from Specifications Should Not Have Been Imported Into the Claims

The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s summary judgement of noninfringement, finding that the lower court had improperly construed the claim term “pull cord.” The district court had erroneously limited...more

MoFo Life Sciences

In Patent Prosecution, You Have the Right to Remain Silent. Anything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You in the Court of Law

MoFo Life Sciences on

While a Miranda warning isn’t given prior to starting substantive examination, perhaps it should be. In Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories, Ltd., a precedential decision issued on April 8, 2025, the Federal...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending April 11, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., No. 2023-1977 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) Apr. 8, 2025). Opinion by Murphy (sitting by designation), joined by Moore and Chen. Azurity owns a patent directed to non-sterile...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Prosecution Disclaimer Alive and Well, Especially in Closed Claim

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s noninfringement determination, finding that the presence of a disclaimed compound in the accused product precluded infringement. Azurity Pharm., Inc....more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Rituxan® (rituximab) / Truxima® (rituximab-abbs) / Ruxience® (rituximab-pvvr) / Riabni™ (rituximab-arrx) - April...

Venable LLP on

Rituximab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd.

Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., Appeal No. 2023-1977 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 8, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed that defendant Alkem’s proposed generic antibiotic did not...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

“Not That Kind of Memory Storage – Judge Oetken Grants Samsung’s Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement”

On March 31, 2025, Judge Oetken granted summary judgment for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and certain of its subsidiaries (“Samsung”) in an infringement suit brought against it by Dynamics Inc. (“Dynamics”). Dynamics Inc v....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Don’t Get Lazy, Timely Complete Your Arguments

This Federal Circuit Opinion analyzes statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1) and examines offensive and defensive arguments related to § 103 obviousness.  Gesture Technology Partners, LLC is the owner of U.S....more

Haug Partners LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Presumption of Separateness in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al., C.A....

Haug Partners LLP on

In a formulation claim, if elements are listed separately, does this necessarily entail that those elements are “separate and distinct components”?  This was the question before the district court in Regeneron...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Federal Circuit Affirms That Expert Testimony Must Be Based on Competent and Reliable Evidence

Mirror Worlds Technologies, LLC (“Mirror Worlds”) sued Meta Platforms, Inc. (“Meta”)—formerly Facebook, Inc.—in the Southern District of New York for patent infringement. The lawsuit involved three patents related to storing,...more

Irwin IP LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Loophole Allowing Patents To Cover Later Developed Technologies

Irwin IP LLP on

In re Entresto, 125 F.4th 1090 (Fed. Cir. 2025) - After Novartis’ patent on the blockbuster blood pressure medication Entresto was found invalid at the district court for covering technology that was developed after the...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

First Quarter 2025 Federal Circuit Law Snapshot

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

Since serving as a Federal Circuit clerk, Michael Hawes has monitored that court's precedential opinions and prepares a deeply outlined index by subject matter (invalidity, infringement, claim construction, etc.) of relevant...more

BakerHostetler

[Podcast] The Changing Landscape: Admissibility of Experts in Patent Cases

BakerHostetler on

Experts play a crucial role in patent cases. Experts opine on claim construction, infringement, invalidity and the proper amount of damages. And the exclusion of an expert witness can significantly impact the outcome of a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Impermissible Convoyed Sales Wash Away Damages Award

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding of infringement but vacated its damages award because the award improperly included auxiliary products lacking any functional relationship to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The Clear and Unmistakable Standard for Applying Prosecution Disclaimer

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a district court misconstrued claim terms based on a misapplication of the clear and unequivocal disavowal standard and vacated its noninfringement decision. Maquet...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending March 28, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Wash World Inc. v. Belanger Inc., No. 2023-1841 (Fed. Cir. (E.D. Wis.) Mar. 24, 2025). Opinion by Stark, joined by Lourie and Prost. Belanger sued Wash World for infringement of a patent related to a spray type car wash...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re: Riggs

In re: Riggs, Appeal No. 2022-1945 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025) Our Case of the Week explores the power of an examiner to request a rehearing after the Board has entered a decision on an application. The case also relates to...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

The Impact of Prosecution Length on Infringement Outcomes in Patent Litigation

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

This article continues our analysis of over 89,000 patents to determine how the number of office actions to allowance during prosecution impacts litigation outcomes. Last month we discussed how prosecution length impacts...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending March 21, 2025

Alston & Bird on

AMP Plus, Inc. v. DMF, Inc., No. 2023-1997 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Mar. 19, 2025). Opinion by Reyna, joined by Lourie and Bryson. DMF owns a patent directed to a compact recessed lighting system that can be installed in a standard...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Get a Grip: Not All Cords Have Handles

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement because the district court improperly narrowed a claim term during its construction. IQRIS Technologies...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Product-by-Process Analysis: Invalidity ≠ Infringement

On March 4, 2025, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) decision in Restem, LLC v. Jadi Cell, LLC, No. 23-2054, 2025 WL 679195, at *1 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 4, 2025), finding that the patent...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re: Xencor, Inc.

In re: Xencor, Inc., Appeal No. 2024-1870 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2025) Our case of the week is an appeal from a decision of the Appeals Review Panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, concerning Xencor’s patent application...more

604 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 25

"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