Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- REGENEXBIO Inc. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- Apple v. Squires: USPTO Director Has Unlimited Discretion on IPR Institution
- The Ghost in the Machine: Why GenAI Can Be Both a Brilliant Researcher and a Terrible Advocate
- Bayer Files Suit Against Trio of COVID-19 Vaccine Makers
- Allen v. Cooper (4th Cir. 2026)
about
Category: Federal Circuit
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Regents of the University of Minnesota v. LSI Corp. on Friday, and perhaps not surprisingly (in view of its decision last summer in Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.), held that State sovereign immunity does not preclude institution of inter…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier this year, in U.S. Water Services, Inc. v. Novozymes A/S, the Federal Circuit reversed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, partially granting judgment as a matter of law in favor of Defendants-Appellees Novozymes A/S and Novozymes North America, Inc. that claims 1, 6,…
-
By Joshua Rich — Parties often push experts to testify outside their area of expertise and leave it up to the expert to push back when uncomfortable. If the expert fails to do so, a party's aggressiveness may come back to haunt it before the Court. That is why the Scentsational case, although nonprecedential, serves…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — There are provisions and interpretations of U.S. patent law that can be in tension depending on the circumstances under which they are argued, whether before an Examiner or during litigation. One of these is the dichotomy between arguing that the prior art would provide insufficient expectation of success to render…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit exhibited the current status of its obviousness jurisprudence in affirming the District Court's determination that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,410,131 were not obvious in a decision handed down this week in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals Int'l. The case arose in ANDA litigation…
-
By Josh Rich — AVX Corporation and Presidio Components are long-standing competitors in the market for electronic components, including capacitors. Their competition has caused animosity, which in turn has resulted in patent infringement litigation. And that litigation led AVX to challenge one of Presidio's patents, U.S. Patent No. 6,661,639, through inter partes review. The Patent…
-
Federal Circuit Reverses Board in Two IPR Decisions By Joseph Herndon — In International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) v. Iancu, the Federal Circuit found that the Board's interpretation of key claim limitations was incorrect resulting in the Board's decisions having errors. IBM owns U.S. Patent No. 7,631,346, entitled "Method and System for a Runtime User…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The latest chapter in the long-running dispute between Amgen and Sandoz over Sandoz's Zarxio® biosimilar to Amgen's Neupogen® biologic drug came to a close last week when the Federal Circuit affirmed grant of summary judgment against Amgen in Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. To recap, Amgen's Neupogen® product (filgrastim) is…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The International Trade Commission, although having limited jurisdiction, can be a very powerful ally to U.S. industries facing foreign competition. The Commission's power to interdict importation of infringing articles can keep them languishing at ports of entry and effect an injunction under circumstances where U.S. district courts' injunctive powers may…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Ever since the Supreme Court handed down its decisions in Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. and Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Mgmt. Sys., Inc. about five years ago, liberalizing (or at least simplifying) the law regarding awarding district court awards of attorneys' fees in patent cases under…
Patent Docs 