Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Inter Partes Review: Validity Before the PTAB
On July 8, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. affirming the district court’s finding that patent claims to a...more
SAGE PRODUCTS, LLC v. STEWART [OPINION] - Before Reyna, Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board did not abuse its discretion by relying on...more
Appellate courts issued a variety of notable intellectual property (IP) cases in 2024, including cases touching on Orange Book listings, extraterritoriality, willful infringement, design patent obviousness, and public...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed six PTAB decisions that held unpatentable as obvious 79 claims of three Cytiva Bioprocess (“Cytiva”) challenged patents and reversed the PTAB decision upholding four claims....more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sitting en banc recently overruled the long-standing test for determining obviousness of design patents in LKQ Corporation, Keystone Automotive Industries, Inc. v. GM Global...more
On May 21, 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an en banc opinion overruling the long-standing Rosen-Durling test for obviousness of design patents in favor of the analytical framework used for...more
In Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Mylan Pharm. Inc., Case No. 2021-1981, the Federal Circuit reversed an obviousness determination by the PTAB. At issue was Sanofi’s reissued U.S. Patent No. RE47,614 (the ’614 patent),...more
VIDSTREAM LLC V. TWITTER, INC. Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Evidence of a prior art reference’s publication date submitted after an IPR petition may be...more
UPDATE: On September 30, 2020, Eli Lilly appealed both decisions by Justice St-Louis: Eli Lilly v Apotex (A-234-20 and A-239-20); Eli Lilly v Pharmascience and Riva (A-236-20); Eli Lilly v Mylan (A-237-20); and Eli Lilly v...more
274-1 Federal Circuit Revisits American Axle & Manufacturing; Case Remanded to Determine if One of the “Hooke’s Law” Claims is Ineligible under Other Theories of Eligibility - The Federal Circuit recently issued a modified...more
Non-Infringement Need Not Be “Actually Litigated” To Shield Accused Products From Infringement Liability In Subsequent Actions - In In Re Personal Web Technologies LLC, Appeal No. 19-1918, the Federal Circuit ruled that the...more
On May 15, 2020, Manson J. of the Federal Court dismissed two actions brought by Biogen under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (PMNOC Regulations) alleging infringement of Patent No. 2,562,277 (277...more
UPDATE: On November 3, 2020, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Amgen’s appeal. See our article here. On April 16, 2020, Justice Southcott of the Federal Court issued the first decision under the amended Patented...more
Last October, the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s decision that a challenged design patent was not obvious. Campbell Soup Co. v. Gamon Plus, Inc., 939 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2019). We wrote about how the court applied a...more
Perfect Your Patent Prosecution Strategies and Master the Patent Application Process in the U.S and Around the World. ACI’s 18th Global Summit on Life Sciences Patents virtual conference this August will provide practical...more
Update: On July 28, 2021, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Seedling’s appeal from Justice Grammond’s decision: Seedlings Life Science Ventures, LLC v Pfizer Canada ULC, 2021 FCA 154 (see article here). On January 2,...more
Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Google LLC et al., Appeal No. 2019-1177 (Fed. Cir., January 30, 2020). Google filed an IPR against Philips’ patent relating to a method of forming a media presentation on a client device from...more
As previously reported, the Federal Court granted Teva’s claim for compensation under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations relating to Teva’s bortezomib product (Janssen markets bortezomib as...more
On December 6, 2019, the Federal Circuit will hear oral argument in a rituximab-related appeal by Biogen. The appeal stems from a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review...more
In a digital-age David versus Goliath case, Dr. Luc Bessette has come head-to-head with the Quebec government in a battle over rights to a technology solution that provides shared access to critical medical information...more
Though politics ruled the headlines in 2016, the year still brought big changes in intellectual property law and its application, most notably in patent subject matter eligibility, inter partes review institution and appeal...more
On November 25, 2016, patent owner Celgene Corporation (“Celgene”) filed a Request for Rehearing in response to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision rendering unpatentable claims to U.S. Patent...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) reversed its previous decision invalidating claims of a patent covering a coaxial cable connector after the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the PTAB...more
The Federal Circuit has ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board cannot deny Patent Owner an opportunity to address portions of a prior art reference first discussed in Petitioner’s Reply, and then rely on those same...more
On October 27, 2016, the PTAB issued four final written decisions invalidating claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,045,501 (“the ’501 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 6,315,720 (“the ’720 Patent”), covering Celgene’s Pomalyst® and...more