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 191

Regents of the University of Minnesota v. ADA Medical Corp., No. 2012-1167 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2013).
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • June 14 2013

An earlier prosecution disclaimer applies to a later application so long as the two have the same or closely related claim limitation language


Bayer Cropscience AG v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 2013-1002 (Fed. Cir. September 3, 2013)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 11 2013

Proposed broad functional construction of “monooxygenase” rejected where it was contrary to plain scientific meaning and would have raised serious


St. Jude Medical, Inc. v. Access Closure, Inc., No. 2012-1452 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 11, 2013).
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2013

Consonance requires that the challenged patent, the reference patent, and the restricted patent claim none of the same inventions identified by the


Keurig, Inc. v. Sturm Foods, Inc., No. 2013-1072 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 17, 2013)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • October 23 2013

The unrestricted sale of a patented apparatus exhausts patent protection on the methods of using the apparatus


nCube Corp. v. SeaChange Int’l, Inc., No. 2013-1066 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 10, 2013)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • October 18 2013

Contempt was not available when the modified product altered the narrow element that had been accused at trial


Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 2012-1042 (Fed. Cir. June 25, 2013)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • July 10 2013

In order to prove induced infringement, a patentee must prove that an alleged infringer possessed actual knowledge that the induced acts would


Wyeth et al. v. Abbott Laboratories et al., No. 2012-1223, -1224 (Fed. Cir. June 26, 2013)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • July 10 2013

A claim on a molecule is not adequately enabled by a specification with only one working example if one of ordinary skill in the art would be


Novo Nordisk AS v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd., No. 2011-1223 (Fed. Cir. June 28, 2013)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • July 10 2013

A synergistic effect that is predictable renders a claim obvious. After being sued for infringement, a generic drug manufacturer sought to invalidate


Plantronics, Inc. v. Aliph, Inc. and Aliphcom, Inc., No. 2012-1355 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2013).
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • August 9 2013

The election of an invention in response to an ambiguous restriction requirement from the PTO cannot form the basis for prosecution estoppel or


Douglas Dynamics, LLC v. Buyers Product Company, 2011-1291, 2012-1046, -1057, -1087, -1088 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2013).
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • May 30 2013

Patentee's profit in the face of infringement does not prevent permanent injunction; "25 rule of thumb" and profit-margin ceilings for royalties