Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- To Require an Inventor ID, or Not to Require an Inventor ID – That Is the Question
- Federal Circuit Refuses to Switch District Court’s Finding for Nintendo
- Supreme Court to Resolve Dispute Over Marketing of “Skinny Labeled” Generics
- Solicitor General Proves Persuasive; Supreme Court Grants Hikma’s Certiorari Petition
- CNIPA Implements Inventor ID Requirement
about
Category: Supreme Court
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — On Wednesday, April 26, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc, involving interpretation for the first time of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA"), which was enacted in 2010 to facilitate the entry of biosimilar drug products into the marketplace. Yesterday's post considered…
-
By Andrew Williams — On Wednesday, April 26, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. case. This case involves the interpretation of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA"), which will be the Court's first opportunity to consider this statute enacted in 2010 to facilitate the entry…
-
By Andrew Williams — As we reported last week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC case on Monday March 27. In that previous report, we covered the background of the case, and presented the positions of both sides of the issue. Ultimately, this…
-
By Andrew Williams — Next week, on Monday March 27, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC case. This case involves the interpretation of the current patent venue statute. And while interpreting statutory language may seem dry, the outcome of this case could have…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The U.S. Supreme Court overturned another Federal Circuit decision today (this one having been decided en banc by the appellate court), in SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC. The outcome was not a surprise, at least because 1) the decision was consistent with the Court's decision…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier today, in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., the Supreme Court reversed a determination by the Federal Circuit that there are circumstances in which a party may be liable under § 271(f)(1) for supplying or causing to be supplied a single component for combination outside the United States, holding instead…
-
By Andrew Williams — On Friday, the Supreme Court granted both petitions for writs of certiorari and consolidated the Sandoz v. Amgen (No. 15-1039) and Amgen v. Sandoz (No. 15-1195) appeals. Sandoz had petitioned the Court on February 16, 2016 for a writ of certiorari to review one of the issues decided by the Federal…
-
By Donald Zuhn –- After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its tenth annual list of top patent stories. For 2016, we identified twenty stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had (or are likely to have) a significant impact on patent practitioners and…
-
By Andrew Williams — In the past few years, the Supreme Court has been single-handedly tackling the so-called Patent Troll problem. Sure, in that time, the President and Congress have made Patent Trolls a focus of their agendas, and have proposed many initiatives or legislative solutions to address the perceived problem. And the mainstream media…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit's decision in Amgen v. Sandoz, regarding litigation "under" (or at least based upon) the Biologics Price Control and Innovation Act (BPCIA), interpreted for the first time two provisions of the law. The first was whether the requirement in the law that the biosimilar applicant (BA) disclose its…
Patent Docs 