The Journey of Litigation
Quick Guide to Administrative Hearings
Wire Fraud Litigants Beware: Fourth Circuit Ruling Protects the Banks — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: The Tale of Two Washingtons — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
How confidential is a request to access or challenge information in INTERPOL’s files?
Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: The Legal Frontlines in Iowa and Indiana — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
(Podcast) The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Update on the State of Non-compete Restrictions (LaborSpeak)
UPIC Audits
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
#WorkforceWednesday®: Federal Contractors Alert - DEI Restrictions Reinstated by Appeals Court - Employment Law This Week®
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Exploring Procedural Justice | Judge Steve Leben | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Jiaxing Super Lighting Electric Appliance, Co. Ltd. v. CH Lighting Technology Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2023-1715 (Fed. Cir. July 28, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed three issues arising from a...more
On July 18, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a $106 million jury verdict in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC, No. 2023-2153, finding that Colibri’s infringement claim under...more
Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Ozobax is indicated for treatment of spasticity resulting from multiple sclerosis, and particularly flexor spasms and concomitant pain, clonus, and muscular rigidity. While the use...more
Case Name: Jazz Pharms., Inc. v. Avadel CNS Pharms., LLC, Nos. 2024-2274, 2024-2277, 2024-2278, 2025 WL 1298920 (Fed. Cir. May 6, 2025) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Reyna, and Taranto presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from...more
COLIBRI HEART VALVE LLC v. MEDTRONIC COREVALVE, LLC - Before Taranto, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Federal Circuit reversed a $106 million...more
On July 18, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a lower court ruling in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC, holding that prosecution history estoppel barred the patentees’ doctrine...more
Prosecution history estoppel typically arises when a claim is rejected during prosecution and is then amended (narrowed) to overcome the rejection. However, in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC, No....more
In a July 18 precedential decision in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned a $106 million jury verdict against Medtronic for infringement of a patent...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a jury’s infringement finding, concluding it was precluded by prosecution history estoppel. Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve LLC, Case No. 23-2153 (Fed....more
Concluding that the principles of prosecution history disclaimer apply to design patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s denial of judgment as a matter of law and entry of a jury...more
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
Insulet v EOFlow UPC_CoA_768/2024 (Ord_69078/2024) The Unified Patent Court (UPC) Court of Appeal has issued a significant decision that provides important guidance on the interpretation of patent claims in UPC...more
On July 8, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the validity of a Janssen patent, finding that Teva did not meet its burden to prove obviousness. In so doing, the Federal Circuit provided...more
Patents are a mutually beneficial agreement between inventors and the government. Each side makes concessions in service of their own, and the greater, good. It’s a careful balance, where policy and rules that are too...more
In two June 2025 decisions, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals rejected patent infringement jury verdicts for $218.5 million and $300 million—one reversed for claiming patent ineligible subject matter, and the other vacated...more
The District Court for the District of Delaware recently rejected Novartis’s effort to block MSN Pharmaceuticals from launching a generic version of Entresto® (sacubitril/valsartan), its top-selling heart failure medication....more
Egenera, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 2023-1428 (Fed. Cir. (D. Mass.) July 7, 2025). Opinion by Stark, joined by Prost and Taranto. Egenera owns a patent related to improved systems and methods for deploying and...more
Xsys Italia v. Esko-Graphics ORD_23545/2025 - The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has delivered a decision clarifying the temporal scope of the UPC’s jurisdiction over European patent infringement...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed (on its second review) a district court’s ruling upholding the validity of patent claims related to a long-acting injectable dosing regimen, finding that the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding of noninfringement, concluding that the patent owner had improperly raised a claim construction issue for the first time on appeal – an...more
Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2025-1228, -1252 (Fed. Cir. July 8, 2025) Our Case of the Week focuses on obviousness. More particularly, the decision included a lengthy...more
Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, Appeal No. 2023-2173 (Fed. Cir. June 30, 2025) In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit reviewed construction of the transitional claim phrase...more
[MITEK SYSTEMS, INC., v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION [OPINION]] - Before Taranto, Schall, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff could not seek...more
ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MODERNA, INC. - Before Taranto, Chen, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Once the high threshold for lexicography is met, there must be a...more
A Delegated Rehearing Panel (“DRP”) recently modified the PTAB’s construction of the claim term “workload” and remanded, giving Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (“Petitioner”) another opportunity to challenge a processor patent....more