Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part IV: The Usefulness Paradox
- Teva Capitulates to Federal Trade Commission Coercion
- USPTO Issues Memoranda on Subject Matter Eligibility
- USPTO Revokes Guidance on AI-Assisted Inventorship, But Rules Remain Basically the Same
- Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part III: Eligible Independent Claims Can Have Ineligible Dependent Claims
about
Category: Infringement – Literal or DOE
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The late Gilda Radner's character, Emily Latella, would consistently misapprehend something ("violins on television," "saving Soviet jewelry"), give a guest editorial on Weekend Update, and when corrected would say "Never mind!" While rare, all courts have such "never mind" moments, and the latest one for the Federal Circuit occurred in…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit again reviewed a determination of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, in this instance by the International Trade Commission (ITC), again finding that one of the Supreme Court's exceptions to the preclusive effects of prosecution history estoppel (the "tangential relationship" test) applied, and affirmed the ITC's finding…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — In its decision in a consolidated appeal, Eli Lilly & Co. v. Hospira, Inc. and Eli Lilly & Co. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Ltd., the Federal Circuit had the occasion to apply the Supreme Court's distinction regarding the limits of prosecution history estoppel on the doctrine of equivalents, regarding the…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last month, in Amgen Inc. v. Coherus BioSciences Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware dismissing a complaint filed by Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Ltd. against Coherus BioSciences Inc. for failure to state a claim. Amgen had filed suit against…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed decisions from four separate trials in the District of Delaware involving seven different defendants regarding validity and infringement of patents directed to an opioid addiction treatment in Indivior Inc. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, S.A. The case arose in ANDA litigation over Indivior's suboxone film…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The doctrine of equivalents, a Supreme Court-created patent doctrine of vintage similar to inequitable conduct, arose in Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co., 339 U.S. 605 (1950) (an uncharacteristically pro-patent decision by the Court, the doctrine recognized that an "unscrupulous copyist" could practice a claimed invention…
-
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 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 Donald Zuhn — Last month, in Ni-Q, LLC v. Prolacta Bioscience, Inc., District Judge Michael H. Simon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon granted a motion for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Ni-Q, LLC that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,628,921, which is assigned to Defendant Prolacta Bioscience,…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last month, in Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. TWi Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey finding that U.S. Patent Nos. 7,722,898; 7,910,131; and 8,821,930 were not invalid and would be infringed by Defendants-Appellants TWi Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and TWi International…
Patent Docs 