A New Jersey federal judge on Friday found that Sandoz Inc.’s proposed generic version of the hypertension drug Remodulin infringes one of two United Therapeutics Corp. patents, rejecting Sandoz's contention that contested claims of both patents are invalid.
New Jersey firm Archer & Greiner PC has filed suit in Pennsylvania federal court against mouthguard manufacturer Brain-Pad Inc., saying Brain-Pad still owes $1.15 million in legal fees incurred in Archer's successful defense against claims that the company's product infringed on an earlier patent.
The Ninth Circuit on Friday ruled that Oracle Corp. can accept $356 million from SAP AG for infringing Oracle's software copyrights or head to a new trial on damages but can't reinstate the $1.3 billion awarded by the jury in the case.
Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to nix the Federal Circuit’s reversal of an infringement finding against Zydus Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. over its planned generic of the acid reflux drug Prevacid SoluTab, arguing the appeals court shouldn’t be allowed to freshly review claim constructions.
A California federal judge on Thursday rejected Wells Fargo & Co.’s bid to bar ABD Insurance & Financial Services Inc. from using the name "ABD," saying that while Wells Fargo owns a valid trademark, it hasn’t shown that it is likely to suffer irreparable harm without an injunction.
Pet jersey manufacturers Hunter MFG LLP and CDI International Inc. urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reject an appeal lodged by rival designer MRC Innovations Inc. seeking to revive its infringement suit, saying no conflict with precedent exists.
In Law360's latest roundup of new actions at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, Exxon Mobil keeps on enforcing its interlocking XX design, Frito-Lay is displeased with a marketing firm called "Crackerjack," and McDonald's files appeals after losing a bid to register its restaurant facades.
The Federal Circuit on Friday found that several claims in Arlington Industries Inc.’s electrical connector patent were obvious, marking a favorable ruling for its rival Bridgeport Fittings Inc. in the competitors’ ongoing intellectual property battle.
Ericsson Inc. and IBM Corp. urged the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Thursday to scrutinize more patents owned by major patent licensing firm Intellectual Ventures Management LLC, filing separate America Invents Act review petitions challenging patents on 4G LTE and web security technology.
Apple Inc. said Friday that it would appeal to the Federal Circuit a California federal judge's refusal to permanently ban Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. from selling several mobile phones and tablets that a jury recently found infringed Apple’s patents.
Stan Lee Media Inc. told a Colorado federal court Thursday that it plans to appeal a $240,000 attorneys' fee award handed to Walt Disney Co. in case over the rights to several Marvel superhero characters, adding another twist to the companies’ ongoing legal saga.
President Barack Obama has nominated Danny Marti, managing partner of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP's Washington, D.C., office, to become the second U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator after the "IP czar" post remained empty for more than a year, the firm said Thursday.
The U.S. Supreme Court's Alice Corp. ruling barring patents on computer-implemented abstract ideas means that Ultramercial Inc.'s patent on online advertising technology is invalid, accused infringer WildTangent Inc. told the Federal Circuit on Wednesday.
The Federal Circuit on Thursday vacated the dismissal of an infringement suit accusing Fry’s Electronics and a video game device manufacturer of flouting a patent over a gun-shaped video game controller, saying a Texas federal judge wrongly tossed the suit because the patent holder failed to comply with a court order.
Apotex Inc. asked a New Jersey federal court to throw out a contract suit against it by rival Mylan Inc., claiming the company can’t show Apotex acted with malice in continuing to sell generic versions of the antidepressant Paxil that it obtained from GlaxoSmithKline PLC.
Snack bar maker Kind LLC told the Second Circuit Thursday that a New York federal judge wrongly denied it a preliminary injunction blocking rival Clif Bar & Co. from using new, allegedly trade dress-infringing packaging, saying the overall look of its product was not properly considered.
A California federal judge on Thursday rejected e-cigarette maker Spark Industries LLC's bid for a preliminary injunction barring competitor Kretek International Inc. from using packaging that allegedly copies Spark's trade dress, saying that the generic Sparks' packaging is easily distinguishable from Kretek's packaging.
GeoTag Inc. filed a malpractice suit against its former attorney and prospective business partner Raj Abhyanker in Texas federal court Wednesday, alleging he fraudulently assigned himself an ownership stake in three patents related to his social networking site.
A retired physician urged a Pennsylvania federal court on Wednesday not to grant Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP and an ex-associate summary judgment in a suit accusing them of improperly sharing his proprietary surgical stapling technology, calling it a "relatively simple" case of misappropriation of trade secrets.
Italian food importer and luxury restaurant chain operator Cipriani Group Inc. on Wednesday targeted Cipriani’s Pasta and Sauce Inc. in a complaint in New York federal court, accusing the company of blatantly infringing its trademarks and causing irreparable harm to its goodwill and reputation.
Every business runs at least in part on technology — and, when contracting for technology products and services, the “gotchas” don’t discriminate based on size or industry. All parties can benefit from avoiding these situations, says Craig Auge of Vorys Sater Seymour and Pease LLP.
Although the Washington Redskins’ most recent appeal was expected, the circumstances surrounding this appeal are significantly different from their appeal over a decade ago, says Arsi Hagos, a special assistant U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia.
While some will debate whether the Federal Circuit’s holding in Gilead Sciences Inc. v. Natco Pharma Ltd. is an expansion of obviousness-type double patenting or a redefinition of how patents qualify for ODP post-URAA, the decision seems to conflict with recent Federal Circuit opinions having similar facts, say Carl Morales and Samuel Abrams of Dechert LLP.
Thanks to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, there are now a variety of ways to challenge the validity of a U.S. patent and, while it can be difficult to develop a strategy against biological/pharmaceutical patents, there is some conventional wisdom beginning to emerge, says William Haulbrook of Choate Hall & Stewart LLP.
The Federal Trade Commission has increasingly challenged conditional pricing practices, but without articulating a bright-line rule. Practitioners should always consider whether the economic realities of a client’s industry lends itself to one analysis over the other, say attorneys with Ballard Spahr LLP.
A more thorough understanding of the Federal Circuit's decision in Gilead Sciences Inc. v. Natco Pharma Ltd. can assist patent practitioners and their clients in identifying current and future obviousness-type double-patenting situations not previously envisioned, say Carl Morales and Samuel Abrams of Dechert LLP.
Gnosis SpA v. South Alabama Medical Science Foundation and Gnosis SpA v. Merck & Cie, among other cases, represent the tipping point for the inter partes review process, making it the default, go-to option for pharmaceutical-related patent cases, says Joseph Cwik of Husch Blackwell LLP.
Two recent opinions — Consumer Watchdog v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation and MadStad Engineering Inc. v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office — demonstrate the Federal Circuit’s critical examination of Article III standing in appeals of PTO decisions in post-grant proceedings, say Michael Abernathy and Gina Jenero of K&L Gates LLP.
"If you follow the philosophy of saving everything you're just multiplying exponentially the costs and risks of litigation and investigations," says Robert Owen, partner in charge of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP's New York office and president of the Electronic Discovery Institute.
In Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Amneal Pharms Inc., a New York federal court recently rejected an attempt by generic defendants to prevent litigation counsel for the innovator company from participating in related inter partes review proceedings, absent explicit language in a protective order. This issue will continue to arise unless care is exercised in negotiating protective orders, say Bruce Wexler and Jason Christiansen of Paul Hastings LLP.