Analysis of patent litigation, PTAB practice, prosecution and pharma IP, written on the data behind LexDana.
Tagged intellectual property law · clear
UCB, INC. v. WATSON LABORATORIES INC. Before Taranto, Schall, and Chen . Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary : Application of the doctrine of equivalents may not be barred by: (1) prosecution history estoppel…
FOOD MARKETING INSTITUTE V. ARGUS LEADER MEDIA. Before the Supreme Court with J. Gorsuch delivering the majority opinion. Summary: Commercial or financial information is confidential under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) when it is (1) both…
IANCU V. BRUNETTI Before the United States Supreme Court (Opinion by Justice Kagan ) on Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Summary : The Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering immoral or scandalous…
GAME AND TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. v. ACTIVISION BLIZZARD INC. Before Prost, Lourie, and Wallach . Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Summary : A single prior art reference can render a patent obvious if it would have been obvious to modify…
A new bill introduced in Congress last week may limit the ability of branded pharmaceutical companies to extend the period of exclusivity products beyond the term of a single patent. The bill, titled “Terminating the Extension of Rights…
FORUM US, INC. v. FLOW VALVE, LLC Before Reyna , Schall and Hughes. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. Summary : The original patent on which a broadening reissue patent is based must clearly and unequivocally…
HYOSUNG TNS INC. V. ITC Before Dyk , Clevenger, and O’Malley. Appeal from the International Trade Commission. Summary : Past investments can satisfy the ITC’s domestic industry requirement if (1) the investments pertain to products covered by…
REGENTS OF THE UNIV. OF MINN. v. LSI CORPORATION Before Dyk , Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : State sovereign immunity does not apply to IPR proceedings asserted against patents owned by or assigned to states,…
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC v. SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENTS Before Prost , Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : An IPR is time-barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) if, at the time of institution, the petitioner is in privity…
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. v. ELM 3DS INNOVATIONS, LLC Before Moore , Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : If the technology is complex, a party may be required to provide more evidence of a reasonable expectation of…
In lengthy hearings conducted by the Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property (of the Committee on the Judiciary) on June 4th and 5th (Parts I and II; Part III will be held on June 11th ), the Subcommittee, chaired by Senators Tillis and Coons, 30 IP…
A federal court in Wisconsin recently awarded Ultratec, Inc. and Captel, Inc. more than $5.4 million in damages, based on a patent infringement claim brought against Sorenson Communications and CaptionCalls. The patent is directed toward technology to…
