News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Patent Litigation

McCarter & English, LLP

Navigating the Landscape of Patent Challenges at the USPTO

Challengers striving to beat higher-ranked opponents at the US Open tennis tournament happening now in New York are not the only challengers facing tricky new situations. Parties wishing to challenge the validity of US...more

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

Reexamination and Reissue for Plant Patents: An Underused Avenue for Patent Owner’s to Strengthen Cultivar Protection

As plant innovation moves into a new era—driven by climate adaptation, consumer preferences, and advanced breeding techniques—most attention on plant patents focuses on securing the initial grant. Yet, in rare instances,...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Specification controls: Written description must be clear

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s decision upholding patent validity, finding that the subject patent’s specification clearly established that the written description failed to...more

Goodwin

UK Court of Appeal Upholds Moderna mRNA Patent Against Pfizer/BioNTech

Goodwin on

On August 1, 2025, a UK Court of Appeal upheld the validity of Moderna’s European Patent No. 3,590,949 (“EP’949”) in a dispute with Pfizer and BioNTech. The decision affirmed a July 2024 UK High Court ruling finding that...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Collateral estoppel remains inapplicable to unchallenged IPR claims

Returning to its decision in Kroy IP, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, leaving undisturbed its prior opinion that collateral estoppel does not apply...more

McCarter & English, LLP

New Patent Office Guidance Raises Bar for IPR Petitioners

The Patent Office recently announced that it will begin enforcing a rule that requires that inter partes review (IPR) petitions “specify where each element of the claim is found in the prior art patents or printed...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

A Weighty Decision by the Federal Circuit Reverses Patent Ineligibility Ruling

In a significant decision for patent law and the fitness equipment industry, a panel of the Federal Circuit reversed a partial dismissal of PowerBlock Holdings, Inc.’s patent infringement claims brought against iFit, Inc. in...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Astellas Pharma Inc. v. Zydus, Inc. I

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Myrbetriq is a drug used to treat overactive bladder. It utilizes a hydrogel-based sustained-release oral tablet formulation to control the rate at which the active ingredient,...more

Venable LLP

Jury Finds Botox® Patent Claims Nonobvious and Awards Damages from Daxxify® Sales

Venable LLP on

On July 18, 2025, after a five-day trial, the jury in Allergan v. Revance Case No. 1:21-cv-01411 (D. Del.) entered a verdict finding claim 8 of Allergan’s U.S. Patent No. 7,354,740 (“the ’740 patent”), claim 6 of U.S. Patent...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Motivation, expectation of success negate obviousness presumption in overlapping range case

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

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending July 4, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, No. 2023-2173 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) June 30, 2025). Opinion by Scarsi, joined by Taranto and Stoll. Eye Therapies owns a patent that claims a method for reducing eye redness...more

MoFo Life Sciences

Is Your Claim Open or Closed? Claim Construction Takes on a New Meaning in Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC

MoFo Life Sciences on

On June 30, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, reversing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) claim construction of the phrase “consisting...more

Knobbe Martens

An Eye Toward Prosecution History

Knobbe Martens on

EYE THERAPIES, LLC v. SLAYBACK PHARMA LLC - Before Taranto, Stoll and Scarsi (sitting by designation). The patent’s prosecution history required a restrictive interpretation of the term “consisting essentially of.”...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Discretionary Denials at the PTAB: Strategic Insights for Petitioners and Patent Owners in a Shifting Landscape

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

A set of recently issued memoranda by United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) officials has re-energized the debate around discretionary denials in post-grant trials at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”)....more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Vacates $300 Million Damages Award Due To Flawed Verdict Form

A&O Shearman on

On June 16, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) vacated a $300 million damages award because the district court used a flawed verdict form, which included only a single, blanket question as to...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Legal Lens on the UPC | Q2 2025

The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is revolutionizing the way patents are enforced in Europe, and McDermott’s intellectual property (IP) team is here to help you navigate this dynamic landscape. Our Legal Lens on the Unified...more

Knobbe Martens

Reissue Applications Are Bound by the Scope of the Claims as Written, Not as Intended

Knobbe Martens on

IN RE KOSTIC - Before Stoll, Clevenger, and Cunningham. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. When considering whether a reissue claim broadens the scope of the original patent, the PTAB determines the actual scope...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

USPTO Newest Discretionary Denials on Settled Expectations - Best Practices for Petitioners and Patent Owners

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Recently, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a series of discretionary denials of inter partes review (IPR) petitions, based on a new factor, the “settled expectations” of the Patent Owner....more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending June 20, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. Roku, Inc., et al., Nos. 2023-1674, -1701 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) June 16, 2025). Per curiam opinion, before Louri, Reyna, and Hughes. Ancora owns a patent directed to restricting unauthorized use of...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Optis Cellular Technology, LLC v. Apple Inc.

Optis Cellular Technology, LLC v. Apple Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1904, -1925 (Fed. Cir. June 16, 2025) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a jury decision awarding...more

Volpe Koenig

“Settled Expectations” as the New Gatekeeper for PTAB Discretionary Denials: Why Late-Stage IPRs Are Getting Harder to File

Volpe Koenig on

When Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart denied institution in Dabico v. AXA Power IPR2025-00408  Paper 21, much of the commentary focused on the result....more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending June 13, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., No. 2023-2267 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) June 9, 2025). Opinion by Lourie, joined by Dyk and Reyna....more

McDermott Will & Schulte

No Blank Check: Vendor Can’t Claim Declaratory Judgment From Customer Lawsuits Alone

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a declaratory judgment action, explaining that declaratory judgment jurisdiction does not “arise merely on the basis that a party learns...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Herceptin® (trastuzumab) / Ogivri® (trastuzumab-dkst) / Herzuma® (trastuzumab-pkrb) / Ontruzant® (trastuzumab-dttb)...

Venable LLP on

Trastuzumab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | May 2025

Knobbe Martens on

In Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Avadel Cns Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Appeal No. 24-2274, the Federal Circuit held that injunctions prohibiting the initiation of new clinical trials for paper NDA drugs before patent expiration...more

286 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 12

"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