We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 255

Court cites objects of invention in claim construction

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 24 2015

Pacing Technologies, LLC v. Garmin International, Inc. is one of those Federal Circuit decisions that may send patent practitioners running to their

Humira patent invalid for obviousness type double patenting

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 25 2014

In AbbVie Inc. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology Trust, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's finding that a second patent covering

Federal Circuit finds Solvay HFC patent invalid under 102(g)

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 20 2014

In Solvay S.A. V. Honeywell International Inc., the Federal Circuit upheld the district court's finding that Solavay's HFC patent was invalid under

Federal Circuit affirms use of broadest reasonable interpretation of claims in IPR proceedings

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 5 2015

In affirming the decision of the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit upheld the

Federal Circuit reviews safeguards against hindsight

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 14 2012

In Mintz v. Diets & Watson, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s determination that the claims at issue were obvious

Federal Circuit invalidates Prandin patent claim as obvious

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 27 2013

In its third look at the Novo Nordisk AS patent related to Prandin, in Novo Nordisk AS v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories Ltd., the Federal

Patent term adjustment - challenging applicant delays

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 22 2011

Hoffman-La Roche Inc. and Morphosys AG are among the latest patent holders to file a Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) action against the USPTO

Federal Circuit notes high burden of invoking inherency for obviousness

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 5 2014

In Par Pharmaceutical Inc. v. Twi Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court decision holding the Par claims

Validity of Sequenom patent still to be decided

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 27 2015

Although Sequenom has settled its dispute over U.S. Patent 6,258,540 with some parties (as I noted here), its case against Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc

Three patent issues to watch in 2015

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 7 2015

Well, 2014 was a busy year in patent law, and it wasn't all good news for patent holders. The Supreme Court made 35 USC 101 a significant hurdle to