Patent Law Weblog

recent posts

about

Category: Federal Circuit

  • The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016) (en banc)

    By Kevin E. Noonan — The past decade or so of U.S. patent law has been characterized by a consistent theme between Federal Circuit decisions and the Supreme Court's invalidation of them (and sometimes can be discerned even in those rare instances when the High Court deemed the Federal Circuit's decision below to have been…

  • Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    By Andrew Williams — Last year, the Federal Circuit described the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA") as "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside of an enigma" in the Amgen v. Sandoz case.  Nevertheless, one of the provisions of the BPCIA was still shrouded in mystery after that opinion — the Notice of…

  • Rapid Litigation Management Ltd. v. Cellzdirect, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    By Kevin E. Noonan — As we have had the occasion to say before regarding subject matter eligibility, "[o]ne swallow does not a summer make, nor one fine day . . . ," but the Federal Circuit may have engendered a glimmer of hope that it will once again take up its mantle of patent…

  • BASCOM Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    Federal Circuit Concurrence — Decide Patentability with Patent-Eligibility By Joseph Herndon — The Federal Circuit earlier today vacated a District Court's order dismissing BASCOM's complaint and remanded for further proceedings.  BASCOM sued AT&T Inc. for patent infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,987,606, and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that…

  • Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    Continuation Application Filed on Same Day Parent Issues Satisfies § 120 Requirement That Continuation Be Filed Before the Patenting of Parent By Donald Zuhn — Last week, in Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp., the Federal Circuit reversed the decision of the District Court for the District of Delaware that U.S. Patent No. 7,148,875 ("the '875…

  • MAG Aerospace Industries, Inc. v. B/E Aerospace, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    Equitable Assignor Estoppel Doctrine Expanded by Federal Circuit By Kevin E. Noonan — Arcane aspects of the law are frequently analogized as constituting "traps for the unwary," and patent law seems to have more than its share of minutiae that fall within that characterization.  The equitable principle of assignor estoppel is one example of such…

  • Intelligent Bio-Systems, Inc. v. Illumina Cambridge Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    By Andrew Williams — Have you ever mixed up the obviousness determinations of "motivation to combine" and "reasonable expectation of success"?  If so, you are apparently not alone — the Federal Circuit recently faulted the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of doing just that.  In Intelligent Bio-Systems, Inc. v. Illumina Cambridge Ltd., the Court reviewed…

  • In re TLI Communications LLC Patent Litigation (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    By Michael Borella — This case is notable mainly because it is the first Federal Circuit decision to distinguish itself from Enfish LLC v. Microsoft Corp., and also because it is another reminder that the wall between patentable subject matter, obviousness, and written description is now rubble. TLI sued AV and a number of other…

  • Intendis GmbH v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc., USA (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court spent an inordinate amount of time wrestling with each of their conceptions of the scope and application of the doctrine of equivalents a dozen years ago, coming to an accommodation in the last of the Federal Circuit's decisions in Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu…

  • Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

    By Michael Borella — Some things are rare.  A visit from Halley's comet . . . the Chicago Cubs winning the World Series . . . a season of Game of Thrones without a major character's death . . . and a Federal Circuit panel finding that claims pass muster under 35 U.S.C. § 101. …