Analysis of patent litigation, PTAB practice, prosecution and pharma IP, written on the data behind LexDana.
Tagged intellectual property law · clear
Editors: Scott D. Eads and Nika Aldrich CASE OF THE WEEK Security People, Inc. v. Iancu , Appeal No. 2019-2118 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 20, 2020) This week’s Case of the Week deals with whether a party can challenge the outcome of an inter partes review (IPR)…
The PTAB has been grappling with how to manage IPR petitions for patents that are also being challenged in federal district court, particularly when the district court is set to determine the patent validity prior to the PTAB’s final written…
On June 19, 2020, Kim Kardashian West’s (“Kardashian West”) company KKW Beauty, LLC (“KKW”) was sued in California Superior Court by its business partners Seed Beauty (“Seed”) alleging trade secret infringement.…
BIO-RAD LABORATORIES, INC. v. 10X GENOMICS INC. Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Where elements of preamble are limiting, indivisible terms in the remainder of…
FASTSHIP, LLC v. US Before Dyk, Wallach, and Chen. Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims. Summary: A Court of Claims fee award under 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a), turns on whether the government’s litigation conduct was substantially…
ILLUMINA, INC. v. ARIOSA DIAGNOSTICS, INC. Before Lourie, Moore, and Reyna. Modified opinion following Ariosa rehearing petition. Summary: The Federal Circuit modified its earlier decision and clarified the difference between a natural phenomenon and human…
AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING v. NEAPCO HOLDINGS LLC Before Dyk, Moore, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Claims directed to a law of nature, without more, may not be patent eligible. American Axle &…
ALACRITECH, INC. V. INTEL CORP., CAVIUM, LLC, DELL, INC. Before Stoll, Chen, and Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTAB’s obviousness determination must meet the Administrative Procedure Act’s requirements to be…
XY, LLC v. TRANS OVA GENETICS, LC Before Wallach, Plager, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Summary: Claims directed to improving a method of operating an apparatus may be patent eligible subject matter.…
IBSA INSTITUT BIOCHIMIQUE, S.A. V. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware Summary: A term may be indefinite when the proposed construction is not supported by the record and the meaning is…
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS U.S.A., INC. V. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. Before Prost, Newman, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware Summary: The scope of a contract term may not be interpreted to render a provision…
FANDUEL, INC. v. INTERACTIVE GAMES LLC Before Dyk, Moore, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board does not violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) if it institutes trial and then reconsiders the substantive…
