News & Analysis as of

Patent Act Appeals

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

Smart & Biggar

Relief under Canada’s stringent “due care” standard for missed maintenance fees? Federal Court requires CIPO to consider events...

Smart & Biggar on

In Matco Tools Corporation v Canada (Attorney General), 2025 FC 118 (Matco Tools), the Federal Court found that a decision by the Commissioner of Patents to refuse to reinstate a patent application following the failure to...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Is the End Near for the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents?

On January 24, in Steuben Foods, Inc v. Shibuya Hoppman Corporation, the Federal Circuit found that Steuben had made a compelling argument that the common law Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents (RDOE) did not survive the 1952...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Shibuya Hoppman Corp.

Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Shibuya Hoppman Corp., Appeal No. 2023-1790 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 24, 2025) In its only precedential patent decision this week, the Federal Circuit addressed an “anachronistic exception, long mentioned but...more

Smart & Biggar

Twice is not nice – second notice of allegation may be abusive

Smart & Biggar on

On December 23, 2023, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) held that it was an abuse of process for Apotex to raise invalidity in defending actions under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (Regulations)...more

Smart & Biggar

Federal Court finds PMPRB reasonably concluded Galderma’s patent claiming 0.3% adapalene “pertained to” 0.1% adapalene DIFFERIN

Smart & Biggar on

On January 11, 2024, the Federal Court released its decision concluding that the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB or Board) was reasonable in its redetermination that the invention of Patent No. 2,478,237 (the 237...more

Smart & Biggar

2023 Highlights in Canadian Life Sciences IP and Regulatory Law

Smart & Biggar on

Eli Lilly v Teva, Pharmascience, Riva, Apotex, Mylan (tadalafil, CIALIS) – Following a summary trial, Lilly’s infringement actions were dismissed: composition claims directed to “a physiologically acceptable salt” of...more

Haug Partners LLP

D.C. Circuit Dismisses FTC Antitrust Suit: Exclusive Pharma Patent Licenses Remain Permissible Under The Patent Act

Haug Partners LLP on

On Friday, August 25, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals For The District Of Columbia Circuit affirmed dismissal of an antitrust action brought by the Federal Trade Commission regarding Endo Pharmaceuticals’s grant of an...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - June 2023 #2

In re: John L. Couvaras, Appeal No. 2022-1489 (Fed. Cir. June 14, 2023) In our Case of the Week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeals Board decision that a patent application’s...more

White & Case LLP

UK Supreme Court considers AI inventorship

White & Case LLP on

On 2 March, the UK Supreme Court heard the arguments in Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks, the latest in a growing line of international jurisprudence grappling with issues raised by the use of...more

Smart & Biggar

Federal Court of Appeal dismisses appeal challenging amended basket of comparator countries in PMPRB Regulations

Smart & Biggar on

On December 5, 2022, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) dismissed Innovative Medicines Canada (IMC) and sixteen innovative pharmaceutical companies’ appeal regarding the validity of the amended basket of comparator countries...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - September 2022 #3

Polaris Innovations Ltd. v. Brent, Appeal No. 2019-1483 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 15, 2022) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit provided what appears to be its first precedential opinion construing Section 317 of the...more

Smart & Biggar

Ontario Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of Apotex’s Statutes of Monopolies and Trademarks Act claims regarding olanzapine

Smart & Biggar on

On March 8, 2021, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed Apotex’s claims against Eli Lilly (Lilly) under the Statute of Monopolies, Trademarks Act, and common law conspiracy relating to Canadian Patent No. 2,041,113...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Rules Inventorship Must Be Natural Human Beings

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently confirmed in Thaler v. Vidalthat artificial intelligence (AI) agents cannot be listed as an inventor on a patent because the plain text of the Patent Act requires...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Rage against the Machine: Inventors Must Be Human

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that an artificial intelligence (AI) software system cannot be listed as an inventor on a patent application because the Patent Act requires an “inventor” to be a natural...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2022 #2

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Thaler v. Vidal, Appeal No. 2021-2347 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 5, 2022) - In its only precedential patent decision this week, the Federal Circuit answered a question that had long occupied the musings...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Australia Appeal Decision Reverses Direction on AI Inventorship

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Over the past few years technology evangelist and inventor Stephen Thaler, together with the Artificial Inventor Project, has campaigned for patent law changes across jurisdictions to recognize artificial intelligence (AI) as...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

In Qualcomm v. Apple, Federal Circuit Rules Out Applicant Admitted Prior Art As the “Basis” for Inter Partes Review

On the first of February, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) on two inter partes review (“IPR”)...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Update on Artificial Intelligence as a Patent Inventor

Our previous blog posts, Artificial Intelligence as the Inventor of Life Sciences Patents? and Update on Artificial Intelligence: Court Rules that AI Cannot Qualify As “Inventor,” discuss recent inventorship issues...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Federal Circuit Vaporizes Pre-Suit Damages

Section 287 of the U.S. Patent Act gives a patent owner the ability to recover damages for patent infringement in two ways: (1) if a patented article is marked; or (2) if actual notice of infringement has been provided. The...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Reverses $1.2 Billion Verdict in Juno v. Kite Pharma, Invalidating Genus Claims to a Three-Part...

Functional claims took another hit at the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. The patent at issue broadly claimed a three-part chimeric antigen receptor including all scFvs that bind to any target. The Court found written...more

Smart & Biggar

FCA remits pricing decision on ALEXION’S SOLIRIS to PMPRB

Smart & Biggar on

Update: On September 29, 2021, Canada applied to the Supreme Court of Canada for leave to appeal (Docket No. 39858). In September 2017, the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB or Board) decided (see article here)...more

Smart & Biggar

Federal Court of Appeal upholds decision finding Seedlings' LifeCard patent invalid and not infringed by Pfizer’s EpiPen

Smart & Biggar on

On July 28, 2021, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) dismissed Seedling’s appeal from the Federal Court decision of Justice Grammond (2020 FC 1, previously reported), which concluded that certain claims of Seedlings' LifeCard...more

McDermott Will & Emery

10th Circuit Falls into Line on Exceptionality Doctrine in Lanham Act Cases

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing whether the term “exceptional case” in the Patent Act differs in meaning from the same term used in the Lanham Act, the US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit upheld an award of attorneys’ fees granted under a...more

Smart & Biggar

Federal Court of Appeal finds Minister of Health’s refusal to grant a CSP for SHINGRIX is reasonable

Smart & Biggar on

In the first appellate decision relating to Certificates of Supplementary Protection (CSPs), the Federal Court of Appeal has allowed the appeal of the Minister of Health (the Minister), setting aside the lower court judgment....more

86 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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