When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that pay-for-delay deals may violate antitrust law, it largely left it up to the lower courts to figure out how to make the traditional rule-of-reason analysis work for the pharmaceutical patent settlements. Here are a few arguments to look out for as trial courts struggle to weigh the pros and cons of the controversial agreements.
Virginia Innovation Sciences Inc. sued Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and two of its subsidiaries in Virginia federal court Friday, alleging that a host of the South Korean electronics giant's smartphones, tablets and accessories infringe patents covering the transfer of information from a mobile network to a television.
Japan's Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. has won a patent infringement suit after proving to a New Jersey federal judge that Zydus Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.'s proposed generic gastric relief product would unfairly compete with Takeda's Prevacid SoluTab medication, according to a ruling released Friday.
The number of patent lawsuits filed last year jumped 29 percent over 2011 to reach the highest level ever recorded, while a spate of unusually large damages awards made 2012 a "colossal year" for patent litigation, according to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP released Tuesday.
An Illinois federal jury Friday delivered a verdict mostly in favor of a small hobby business accused of infringing copyrights and trademarks covering tabletop battle game Warhammer 40,000 by selling customizable add-on components for figurines and vehicles used in the game.
A New York federal judge ruled Monday that Kate Spade LLC’s Kate Spade Saturday line of apparel does not infringe on a registered trademark by men's retailer Saturdays Surf LLC, finding that there is unlikely to be any consumer confusion between the two marks.
The Federal Circuit on Tuesday affirmed a lower court's ruling that a patent covering Novo Nordisk A/S' diabetes treatment Prandin is invalid as obvious, handing a victory to generics makers Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories Ltd. and Paddock Laboratories Inc.
The Federal Circuit on Tuesday affirmed the dismissal of IA Labs CA LLC’s infringement suit alleging Nintendo Co. Ltd.'s Wii Fit video game and its accompanying balance board ripped off one of its patents.
Polsinelli PC recently scooped up 10 attorneys from Husch Blackwell LLP, additions that expand its government contracts practice in Washington, D.C., grow its toxic tort practice in St. Louis and create a Tennessee office that includes attorneys focused on real estate law and intellectual property issues in large transactions.
Real estate website operator Trulia Inc. asked a Washington federal judge on Monday to nix a lawsuit accusing it of infringing the patent for competitor Zillow Inc.'s home valuation service, arguing that a recent Federal Circuit ruling renders Zillow's abstract idea patent-ineligible.
The U.S. Tennis Association sued the filmmakers of a documentary about Venus and Serena Williams in New York federal court Friday, claiming the new film used copyrighted footage from the U.S. Open without licensing permission.
The Federal Circuit on Tuesday revived Levi Strauss & Co.'s challenge to an Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co. stitch design trademark at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, reversing the office's ruling that an earlier district court case barred Levi's challenge.
Computer-sharing software maker MiniFrame Ltd. on Friday urged the Second Circuit to reinstate a $1 billion antitrust suit against Microsoft Corp., saying that changes to licensing rules for Windows operating systems harmed competition in the market for computer-sharing software.
SAP America Inc. on Monday urged the Federal Circuit to stay an injunction and a $391 million damages award the court ordered SAP to pay for infringing Versata Software Inc.'s patent on pricing methods after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office invalidated the patent in its first-ever decision in a patent challenge under the America Invents Act.
Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky & Popeo PC has snapped up a former U.S. International Trade Commission investigative attorney for its intellectual property group in Washington, D.C., the firm said Monday.
A U.S. International Trade Commission judge on Monday issued a preliminary ruling that said a Chinese company had stolen a New York company's secret recipe for rubber resins then imported the copycat material into the U.S.
U.S. Supreme Court activism in our area is a little scary right now. The Myriad decision invalidates thousands of patents that enabled U.S. biotech businesses to thrive, says Allen Baum, co-chairman of Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione's chemicals, energy and agriculture practice group.
Technology company Rambus Inc. and global semiconductor producer STMicroelectronics NV signed an agreement that expands existing licenses between them and settles litigation over Rambus patents and other outstanding claims, the companies announced Monday.
The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling Monday allowing antitrust challenges to reverse payment patent settlements breathed new life into lawsuits targeting pharmaceutical companies over pay-for-delay deals, with most cases likely to survive early dismissal bids as trial judges apply traditional antitrust analysis, experts say.
The U.S. Supreme Court's Monday ruling allowing antitrust challenges to pay-for-delay settlements will reshape how drugmakers settle patent disputes, attorneys say, since the court stressed that a generics maker will have to do more than agree to stay off the market in order for a payment from a branded company to be legal.
The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. begged for clarification of how trial courts can determine what constitutes "common sense" for use in obviousness determinations. In DatCard v. Pacsgear, a California federal court recently prescribed what a defendant can show to establish through common sense the existence of elements not explicitly found in prior art references, say attorneys with Dentons LLP.
In its much-anticipated decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court rejected both the “scope of the patent” approach to analysis of pay-for-delay deals and the FTC’s proposed presumption of illegality, putting the question squarely back where it belongs — on rigorous analysis of the economic effects of the settlement agreement at issue, say Sumanth Addanki, Alan Daskin and Christine Meyer of NERA Economic Consulting.
The Federal Circuit's recent decision in CLS Bank Int’l v. Alice Corp. does not help clear things up on the issue of subject matter eligibility, but it doesn't obfuscate things any further either. While this opinion clearly highlights the need for further guidance from either Congress or the U.S. Supreme Court, little has changed for those seeking to obtain patent protection on computer implemented methods, say Guy Gosnell and Jim Carroll of Alston & Bird LLP.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board should be applauded for its timeliness and its willingness to make some clear statements in its first written decision in a covered business method review under the America Invents Act, SAP America Inc. v. Versata Development Group Inc. But this was a missed opportunity to clarify Section 101 validity issues, says Susan Pan of Sughrue Mion PLLC.
International patent licensing can be challenging. In the U.S., most licensing arrangements are analyzed under the rule of reason, which can create uncertainty. In China, there are multiple sources of law and a lack of precedent. And in Korea, legality turns on whether the restraint is reasonably related to a legitimate business justification, says Koren Wong-Ervin, a consultant in the Office of International Affairs at the Federal Trade Commission.
While the U.S. Supreme Court's long-awaited decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Inc. may be considered a “win” for both parties, the decision to strike down purely isolated genetic material as unpatentable will have resounding effects on DNA patents and those practicing in the biotechnology arts, say Patrice Jean and Brooke Hazan of Kenyon & Kenyon LLP.
There are several critical decision factors to weigh to assess whether Technology Assisted Review is right for a discovery project — for example, the nature of the case, internal capabilities, production considerations and overall comfort with this technology, say Michele Lange and Joseph White of Kroll Ontrack Inc.
Throughout the generic top-level domain application process, applications for generic and legally defined terms have been the source of significant debate, and new developments show that the debate may continue — possibly even after the process ends, says Heather Nolan of InfoLawGroup LLP.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board's June 11 ruling in SAP America Inc. v. Versata Dev. Group Inc. that the patent claims are invalid conflicts with the Federal Circuit’s infringement judgment against SAP. Such contrary conclusions between administrative agencies and judicial bodies may be on the rise given the availability of the America Invents Act’s new post-issuance proceedings, say attorneys with McDermott Will & Emery LLP.
Jury selection can be particularly important in patent litigation, where the fact issues tend to be complex and the legal doctrine foreign to the average person. But focus can so easily be directed elsewhere during patent trial preparation, and jury selection often gets attention only late in the process and not in enough depth, say Bill Lee and Claire Superfine of WilmerHale and Douglas Green of Douglas Green Associates.