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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 431

Heinz “Dip & Squeeze” suit headed to trial
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • January 23 2015

A Pennsylvania federal court has denied H.J. Heinz Co.'s motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit alleging that the company stole the idea for the


Jury finds for Heinz in “Dip & Squeeze” packet dispute
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 3 2015

A federal jury in Pennsylvania has found that H.J. Heinz Co. did not appropriate the idea of a dual-opening condiment packaging, the "Dip & Squeeze"


Federal Circuit affirms USDA’s grape patents
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • January 16 2015

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a lower court's ruling that unauthorized public use of the Scarlet Royal and Autumn King varieties


Fractured Myriad Genetics ruling follows SCOTUS remand
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 30 2012

Ruling that one plaintiff had standing to seek a declaratory judgment as to the patent eligibility of certain genetic discoveries, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has once again reversed in part and affirmed in part a lower court’s determination that isolated DNA molecules and methods of comparing molecules to determine whether a patient’s genes have mutations that could cause breast and ovarian cancer were not patent eligible


Federal Circuit addresses personal jurisdiction in patent infringement litigation
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 30 2012

Finding that the U.S. Supreme Court “has yet to reach a consensus on the proper articulation of the stream-of-commerce theory” of personal jurisdiction to assess whether a court has jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant in a patent infringement suit, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has applied its own theory, which assesses the pleadings and evidence under “any articulation of the stream-of-commerce theory,” and has determined that a district court in Wyoming properly dismissed two patent infringement lawsuits for lack of jurisdiction


Third Circuit refuses to stay effect of anti-competitive ruling in pay-for-delay case
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 30 2012

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has denied a request that it stay the mandate of its July 2012 ruling that “any payment from a patent holder to a generic patent challenger who agrees to delay entry into the market must be treated by a factfinder as prima facie evidence of an unreasonable restraint of trade.”


Another domino? The conundrum of antitrust policy v. patent rights
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 1 2012

Are we on the brink of another domino falling in the battle to protect patent rights?


Patent reforms targeting abusive litigation remain stalled in Senate
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 22 2014

A coalition of companies, trade associations and startups concerned about delays in the U.S. Senate in enacting patent law reforms to address


Keeping the door ajar? Federal Circuit says "it ain't over 'til it's over"
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2013

In a patent infringement lawsuit, when are final rulings "final"? Even the Federal Circuit is struggling with when to call a halt to all the fun


Indian Supreme Court rules Novartis cancer drug change not patentable
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • India
  • April 4 2013

The Supreme Court of India has rejected the patent application filed by Novartis AG for a beta crystalline form of its cancer drug Gleevec, also