Latest Posts › Patents

Share:

Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic Corevalve, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2025)

The doctrine of equivalents (DOE), a creation of the Supreme Court in Graver Tank & Mfg. v. Linde Air Products (1950), is balanced by the concept of prosecution history estoppel (PHE), the contours of which were delineated...more

Shockwave Medical, Inc. v. Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Received wisdom is that inter partes review proceedings are limited to prior art as defined by patents and printed publications.  But in recently decided Shockwave Medical, Inc. v. Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., another prior...more

Eye Therapies LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Patent law in many respects has its own language and idiosyncratic expressions, and one such respect involves so-called "transitional" words or phrases (discussed in greater depth in the Manual of Patent Examination Procedure...more

Government Files Statement in Support of Preliminary Injunction Motion in Radian Memory Systems v. Samsung Electronics

Almost two decades ago, the Supreme Court handed down what has turned out to be one of its most significant patent decisions of this century:  eBay v. MercExchange.  The eBay case has had the effect of precluding prevailing...more

Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Cardiovalve Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

One of the assumptions, or promises, or hopes, attendant on the inauguration of post-grant review proceedings (particularly inter partes reviews) under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act was that, as in European Opposition...more

Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Synthego Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

An argument could be made that one of the most significant Supreme Court decisions in U.S. patent law in the last thirty years was Dickinson v. Zurko.  In that case the Court held that the Federal Circuit was bound by the...more

Subject Matter Eligibility in the 21st Century: Echoes of pre-§ 103 Obviousness*

The evolution of subject matter eligibility after the Supreme Court's decisions in Prometheus v. Mayo, Alice v. CLS Bank, and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics has resulted in a regime of predictable...more

Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025) - Update

Only a few days after the one-year anniversary of hearing oral argument, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. on Monday. The opinion reviewed the...more

Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Only a few days after the one-year anniversary of hearing oral argument, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. In short -- and to be explicated more...more

Sage Products, LLC v. Stewart (Fed. Cir. 2025)

When a prevailing challenger withdraws from an appeal in post-grant proceedings, the Director can intervene under 35 U.S.C. § 143, which is what happened in an appeal in Sage Products, LLC v. Stewart after Challenger Becton...more

Recor Medical, Inc. v. Medtronic Ireland Mfg. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

The inter partes review provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act have been criticized for the propensity of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to find invalid all or at least some of the challenged claims,...more

Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Early last year, Aurobindo, one of the Defendants* in ANDA litigation against Merck, advanced the proposition that in cases where a patent had been reissued patent term extension ("PTE") under 35 U.S.C. § 156 should be...more

DNA Genotek Inc. v. Spectrum Solutions LLC (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Sometimes important contributions to innovation can come from the mundane rather than the extraordinary. One (perhaps apocryphal) example comes from the story of the early development of television by Philo Farnsworth (the...more

Immunogen, Inc. v. Stewart (Fed. Cir. 2025)

After creating something of a frisson due to the apprehension that the Federal Circuit might be convinced to re-evaluate whether it was a necessary element for establishing obviousness for the skilled artisan to have had a...more

Aurobindo v. Merck Sharp and Dohme -- Oral Argument

The Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Auribundo's appeal of the district court's decision in favor of plaintiff Merck, in a case captioned In re Sugammadex (alternatively, Aurobindo v. Merck Sharp and Dohme). The issue...more

USPTO Challenges Reasonable Expectation of Success Prong of Obviousness Law Precedent in Immunogen v. Vidal

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has a history of attempting to challenge judicial decisions that the Office, usually for its own policy reasons, takes issue with.[1]  Recently, the Office decided to challenge the...more

Teva v. Amneal -- Amneal's Responsive Brief

The Federal Circuit has been petitioned by plaintiff Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. to reverse a decision in favor of Defendant Amneal Pharmaceuticals, wherein the District Court entered an injunction ordering...more

Vascular Solutions LLC v. Medtronic, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

The metes and bounds of how courts should consider indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) were addressed most recently by the Supreme Court in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., 572 U.S. 898 (2014).  Regardless,...more

Teva v. Amneal -- Amneal's Responsive Brief & Teva's Reply Brief

The Federal Circuit has been petitioned by plaintiff Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. to reverse a decision in favor of Defendant Amneal Pharmaceuticals wherein the District Court entered an injunction ordering...more

In re Cellect in View of Supreme Court's "Long Conference" – Part II

In view of the Supreme Court's "long conference" on September 30th, it seems timely to review the arguments, pro, con, and amicus briefs submitted to the Court asking for certiorari over the Federal Circuit's In re...more

In re Cellect in View of Supreme Court's "Long Conference"

In view of the Supreme Court's "long conference" on September 30th, it seems timely to review the arguments, pro, con, and amicus briefs submitted to the Court asking for certiorari over the Federal Circuit's In re...more

Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

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

Natera, Inc. v. NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

In Natera Inc. v. NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc. the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court's grant of a preliminary injunction against NeoGenomics in patent infringement litigation involving Natera's U.S. Patent Nos....more

United Therapeutics Corp. v. Liquidia Technologies Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

Zealous advocacy is a hallmark of adversarial proceedings, whether in district court or before the USPTO, where the opportunities for such advocacy have multiplied with the establishment by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act...more

Legislators Introduce RESTORE Act

U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE), along with Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), have been the motivating force for patent reform for almost a decade, primarily in their efforts to roll back legislative efforts and judicial decisions...more

793 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 32

"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