News & Analysis as of

Intellectual Property Protection Patent Infringement Claim Construction

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Lexicography: Clear And Unequivocal

This Federal Circuit opinion analyzes lexicography in the context of claim construction. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals owns U.S. Patent Nos. 11,246,933 (parent) and 11,382,979 (child). These patents relate to biodegradable...more

Carlton Fields

Court Finds MSN Does Not Infringe Novartis’s Patent and Clears the Way for Generic Entresto

Carlton Fields on

In In re Entresto (Sacubitril/Valsartan) Patent Litigation, Judge Richard G. Andrews of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware granted MSN Pharmaceuticals Inc. a victory on noninfringement of U.S. Patent No....more

Jones Day

Delegated Rehearing Panel Sends Lifeline to Mercedes-Benz

Jones Day on

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

Jones Day

Federal Circuit: RPI Arguments Must First Be Raised at the PTAB

Jones Day on

Apple Inc., et. al v. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC (March 4, 2025) (Moore (Chief Judge), Prost and Stoll) (on appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board) [WAIVER; OBVIOUSNESS] ....more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit: Plans for Future Activity Created a Substantial Risk of Future Infringement

Jones Day on

Restem filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,803,176, directed to stem cells obtained from umbilical cord tissue and isolated through a two-step process to create a specific cell marker expression...more

Jones Day

Applying Fintiv to a Parallel ITC Investigation

Jones Day on

The Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) recently denied institution of an inter partes review (“IPR”), exercising its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a)and Apple Inc. v. Fintiv Inc., IPR2020-00019 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020)...more

Jones Day

PTAB Institutes IPR Despite Concurrent Ex Parte Reexamination

Jones Day on

In Thermaltake Technology Co., Ltd. et al v. Chien-Hao Chen et al, IPR2024-01230, Paper 12 (PTAB Feb. 19, 2025), the PTAB granted the institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) while an ex parte reexamination (“EPR”) on the...more

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

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

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

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

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

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

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Expands Economic Prong Of Section 337 Domestic Industry Requirement

A&O Shearman on

Lashify, Inc. is an American company, with headquarters and employees in the United States, that distributes, markets, and sells eyelash extensions (and cases and applicators for the eyelash extensions) in the United States....more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court: Incorporation by Reference for Purposes of Anticipation Requires More than a Parenthetical

In a series of rulings on a motion in limine, the District of Delaware recently distinguished between what qualifies as being incorporated by reference and what does not for the purposes of an anticipation defense. In short,...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Rules That Order Of Steps Sometimes Does Matter

Jones Day on

Back in May of 2020, European patent-licensing company Sisvel filed a flurry of lawsuits against a dozen tech companies who had allegedly infringed Sisvel’s portfolio of wireless communication and networking patents. A...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Reexamination of Expired Patents

Takeaways - - Expired patents may be eligible for reexamination. - Owner’s options during reexamination of an expired patent are severely limited. Similar to reexamination practice, which has long allowed reexamination...more

BakerHostetler

A Later-Discovered Improvement to an Invention Cannot Be Used To Reach Back and Invalidate an Earlier-Filed Patent

BakerHostetler on

Novartis markets and sells a combination therapy of valsartan and sacubitril under the brand name Entresto® for the treatment of various forms of heart failure. MSN submitted an Abbreviated New Drug Application seeking...more

Smart & Biggar

Avoiding a finding of ambiguity and ensuring patent validity: the importance of a comprehensive disclosure and defining coined...

Smart & Biggar on

On June 7, 2024, the Federal Court issued its Judgment and Reasons in Tekna Plasma Systems Inc v AP&C Advanced Powders & Coatings Inc ( 2024 FC 871), finding all claims of the Defendant’s Canadian Patent No 3,003,502 (502...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

The Precedent: Federal Circuit Sidesteps Ruling on the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents Theory in Steuben Foods Inc. v. Shibuya...

In this edition of The Precedent, we outline the decision in Steuben Foods Inc. v. Shibuya Hoppmann Corp. This case addresses whether the reverse doctrine of equivalents (RDOE) is a viable defense to patent infringement....more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: Written Description and Enablement Depend on What a Patent 'Claims,' Not What the Claims Cover

The Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court decision that found a patent that did not describe after-arising technology failed to satisfy the written description requirement. In so doing, the Federal Circuit...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending February 7, 2025

Alston & Bird on

HD Silicon Solutions LLC v. Microchip Technology, Inc., No. 2023-1397 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Feb. 6, 2025). Opinion by Lourie, joined by Stoll and Cunningham....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | January 2025

Knobbe Martens on

In Honeywell International Inc. v. 3G Licensing, S.A., Appeal No. 23-1354, the Federal Circuit held that under the obviousness standard of 35 U.S.C. § 103, the motivation to modify prior art does not need to be the same as...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

The Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents is Alive, but Not Well

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

In its recent decision in Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Shibuya Hoppmann Corp., 2023-1790 (Fed. Cir., 2025), the Federal Circuit, while not directly addressing whether the reverse doctrine of equivalence (RDOE) is a valid defense to...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Cabometyx® (cabozantinib (L)-malate) - Case Name: Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd., No. 22-228-RGA, 2024 WL 4491176 (D. Del. Oct. 15, 2024) (Andrews, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Cabometyx®...more

148 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 6

"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