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 62

Decoding Patent Eligibility of Diagnostic Methods
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 31 2016

Figuring out whether an invention is patent-worthy has become a bit easier, thanks to the Federal Circuit’s clarifications in Genetic Technologies


Second Circuit antitrust decision creates uncer tainty for non-practice of patents
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 11 2015

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit's recent decision in New York v. Actavis PLC appeared on its face to address a narrow issue of


Argument on remand scheduled in Myriad Genetics
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 17 2012

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled briefing and oral argument in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Myriad Genetics), which the U.S. Supreme Court remanded for reconsideration in light of the Court’s ruling in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012


Eleventh Circuit turns aside FTC challenge to pay-for-delay deal
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 3 2012

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed an antitrust action filed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against a name-brand prescription drug manufacturer (the patent holder) and generic drug companies that entered into pay-for-delay agreements to settle patent infringement claims filed against the generic drug companies


Federal Circuit refuses to consider standingmootness issue in Myriad Genetics
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 21 2012

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a non-precedential order declining Myriad Genetics’ invitation to revisit whether the plaintiff has standing, that is, a redressable legal interest in maintaining the lawsuit, and will thus consider, on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, whether isolated DNA claims and method claims are patent-eligible under Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012


Federal Circuit’s patent infringement ruling conflicts with USPTO re-examination on validity
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • November 1 2012

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has denied a request for an en banc rehearing by a medical-device patent holder which argued that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) Board of Patent Appeals had effectively nullified a previous Federal Circuit decision on the validity of its patent


Federal Ccircuit panel returns to Gore-Tex graft dispute, clarifies willfulness standard for enhanced damages
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 21 2012

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated parts of its February 2012 decision in a long-running patent dispute over a prosthetic vascular graft and remanded the matter for the district court to address the objective prong of the willfulness standard and reconsider its denial of W.L. Gore’s motion for judgment as a matter of law of no willful infringement. Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. v. W.L. Gore & Assoc., Inc., No. 2010-1510 (Fed. Cir., decided June 14, 2012


Exhaustion doctrine applied to method patent
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • November 21 2013

A divided Federal Circuit Court of Appeals panel has determined that a method patent holder that gave away 60 percent of the blood-glucose testing


Court denies Myriad’s request to enjoin sale of rival BRCA1BRCA2 tests
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • March 20 2014

A federal court in Utah has denied the request for a preliminary injunc- tion filed by Myriad Genetics against a rival company that offered tests


New infringement lawsuit filed to protect BRCA1 and BRCA2 patents
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 26 2014

Myriad Genetics has brought a new infringement lawsuit against a company offering a next-generation sequencing test that analyzes the BRCA1 and BRCA2