A Judicial Perspective on Using Technology at Oral Argument | Judge John Owens | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
On May 21, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, reversed a $20 million damages award against Google LLC in a patent infringement dispute with EcoFactor, Inc. EcoFactor, Inc. v....more
In our previous articles, we reported that the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision on December 20, 2024 ordering Teva Pharmaceuticals (“Teva”) to delist certain patents related to Teva’s ProAir® HFA...more
In our previous article, we reported that the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision requiring Teva to delist certain patents related to its Teva’s ProAir® HFA metered-dose inhaler from the FDA’s Orange...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
In 2019, Edwards Lifesciences Corporation sued Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. for patent infringement in the Northern District of California, with Fenwick representing Meril in the district court case and the recent appellate...more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., has garnered significant attention, especially concerning the application of the “safe harbor” provision under 35 U.S.C. §...more
A fractured affirmance of a district court decision to dismiss an infringement action under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) was the occasion for the Federal Circuit to illustrate the continued debate over the scope of the safe harbor...more
This weekly series provides brief summaries to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets on more than 40 340B cases to provide you with a quick...more
The past year brought many developments in the life sciences patent legal space. Three decisions in particular hold potential ramifications for drug makers and patent holders in 2023. This year, the Supreme Court of the...more
As we have previously discussed, on February 11, 2021, the Federal Circuit decided Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC, et al. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of JMOL that Amgen’s Repatha®...more
Based on the denial of rehearing and the Amgen v. Sanofi decision itself, inventors should: Claim as many separate species as possible. Attempt to fashion genus claims that have a limited number of members supported...more
FDA regulation of biomedical products can be like a very complex game theory decision tree. Choices made at each intersection impact the ultimate regulatory framework under which any given product is developed, seeks...more
Although argument week isn’t until next week, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument today in two cases. One was rescheduled from earlier this month for medical reasons. But the other, GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva...more
In the sprawling National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL 2804), proponents of a “negotiation class” recently asked the Sixth Circuit for en banc review of a September 2020 decision that struck down the novel class...more
As we previously reported, following the Federal Circuit’s ruling in St. Regis Mohawk Tribe v. Mylan that “tribal immunity cannot be asserted in IPRs,” Allergan and the Tribe petitioned for rehearing en banc. The petition was...more
Last month, the USPTO issued a memorandum to its patent examining corps clarifying its guidance concerning the written description requirement for claims drawn to antibodies. In the memorandum, the USPTO adopts the Federal...more
The Third Circuit recently denied a petition for rehearing en banc a panel’s earlier decision in the In re Flonase Antitrust Litigation. In that case, the panel decision addressed the degree to which class settlements can...more
As we reported previously, Amgen is seeking en banc review of the Federal Circuit panel decision vacating a permanent injunction that would have otherwise prohibited the sale of Sanofi and Regeneron’s Praluent® (alirocumab)...more
In an en banc decision issued in The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit determined that in order for a commercial transaction to trigger the on-sale bar of § 35 USC 102(b), it must “bear the general...more
Pharmaceutical and biotech companies breathed a sigh of relief Monday when the Federal Circuit unanimously ruled in a precedential opinion that the mere sale of manufacturing services to create embodiments of a patented...more
On December 23, 2015, the Delaware Supreme Court sitting en banc issued its second opinion in Siga Technologies Inc. v. PharmAthene, Inc. In its first decision, the Court reaffirmed its recent decision in Titan “that where...more
In July, a divided Federal Circuit issued a ruling in the Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc., Case No. 2015-1499 appeal and held: (1) the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act’s (“BPCIA’s”) “patent dance” provisions...more
Recent jurisprudence on the issue of divided infringement has arisen in the context of computer-related technologies, where a user or customer performs one or more steps of a patented method. Now the issue has arisen in the...more
SUPREME COURT CASES - The Supreme Court Upholds Prohibition on Charging Royalties After Patent Expiration - In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment LLC, 576 U.S. ---- (2015), the Supreme Court declined to overrule its 1964...more
Case Name: Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., 769 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 20, 2014) (Chief Judge Prost, Circuit Judges Newman, Plager, Lourie, Dyk, Moore, O’Malley, Reyna, Wallach, Taranto, Chen, and...more