Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Noteworthy Points in the Rules for the Implementation of China's Patent Law 2023
5 Key Takeaways | Best Practices in Patent Drafting: Addressing 112 and Enablement after Amgen
(Podcast) The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
Intellectual Property In Department of Defense Contracting
On August 13, 2024, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision, authored by Judge Lourie, in Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 24-1061, which limits the...more
Late last week in Natera, Inc. v. NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc. (24-1324), the Federal Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction ruling from the lower court that mostly prohibits NeoGenomics from selling its oncology test...more
Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. Hikma Pharms. USA Inc., Appeal No. 2023-1169 (Fed. Cir. June 25, 2024) In the Court’s only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of...more
There have been only a few precedential decisions from the Federal Circuit related to obviousness since spring sprung. While these decisions have produced mixed results for the lower courts, clinical study protocols have held...more
VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation, Appeal No. 2022-1906 (Fed. Cir. December 4, 2023) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit vacated an approximately $2.2 billion damages award against appellant Intel...more
The Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) decision finding the challenged claims of Sanofi-Aventis’ ’614 patent unpatentable as obvious....more
Mosaic Brands, Inc. v. Ridge Wallet LLC, Appeal Nos. 2022-1001, -1002 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 20, 2022) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit discussed the corroboration requirement concerning the amount of evidence...more
Provisur Technologies, Inc. v. Weber, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-1942, -1975 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 27, 2022) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit reviewed an IPR decision and addressed the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
On April 14, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination in IPR2016-01542 that claims of Amgen’s U.S. Patent No. 8,952,138 are obvious. The ’138 patent claims are directed to...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
In late August of 2021, the Federal Circuit reversed a jury verdict of $1.2 billion in favor of Juno Therapeutics and Sloan Kettering Institute because the jury’s finding that four of the asserted patent claims did not lack...more
Summary judgment, while clearly advantageous, requires that there be no disputed question of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. When a district court grants judgment...more
Last month, in Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey finding certain claims of U.S. Patent...more
In Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnositcs, Inc., (Fed. Cir. Slip Op. 2019-1419, March 17, 2020) the Federal Circuit held that process claims that exploit the discovered size differences between fetal and maternal DNA in serum...more
This month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has handed down a pair of opinions concerning Section 101 in the field of pharmaceuticals and life sciences. In both cases, the district courts held claims of the...more
The latest Federal Circuit decision on subject matter eligibility in the life sciences came down (by a divided court) in favor of eligibility, in Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. The claims at issue fell into the...more
The Federal Circuit reversed a decision from the District Court for the District of Delaware invalidating three patents on anticipation grounds, finding the district court improperly relied on disclosures from multiple...more
In a case relating to compounds for the treatment of the Hepatitis C virus (HCV), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s grant of judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) for lack of enablement...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - HZNP Medicines LLC v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-2149, et al. (Fed. Cir. Oct. 10, 2019) - In a lengthy decision following a bench trial, the Court addressed a matter of...more
In OSI Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Apotex, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination that a Tarceva® patent was invalid as obvious because the decision was not supported by a reasonable expectation of success....more
In OSI Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Aoptex Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018-1925, Oct. 4, 2019), the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (Board) decision that certain claims of US Patent No. 6,900,221 were...more
In reversing a district court decision as to whether a validity issue remained justiciable after the challenged claims were disclaimed, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that the patent owner’s...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Celgene Corporation v. Laura A. Peter, Appeal Nos. 2018-1167, -1168, -1169, -1171 (Fed. Cir. July 30, 2019) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit held that the retroactive...more
Federal Court finds invalidity allegations relating to patent for metformin formulations not justified - On March 8, 2019, Justice Fothergill granted Valeant Canada’s application for an order prohibiting the Minister of...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) erred in calculating a patent term adjustment (PTA) for a patent covering an oral osmotic form of an antihypertensive drug,...more