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 117

Judge Robinson denies Amazon's motion to dismiss complaint that claims patent infringement by Amazon's Kindle products
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • April 28 2012

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Technology Innovations, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., Civil Action No. 11-690-SLR (D.Del., April 25, 2012), the Court denied the motion of defendant Amazon.com, Inc. to dismiss the complaint filed by plaintiff Technology Innovations, LLC for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6


Judge Stark grants defendants' motion for partial judgment on the pleadings based on collateral estoppel in ANDA patent infringement action
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • September 8 2012

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Galderma Laboratories Inc., et al. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al., C.A. No. 11-1106-LPS (D.Del., September 7, 2012), the Honorable Leonard P. Stark granted defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings based on collateral estoppel after finding that the issue of whether a product containing 40 mg of doxycycline, administered once daily, infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 7,232,572 and 7,211,267 (referred to as the “Ashley patents”) was previously litigated and decided against the Galderma plaintiffs in a related ANDA action captioned Research Found. of State Univ. of New York v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., 809 F. Supp.2d 896 (D.Del. 2011) (referred to as the “Mylan Action”


Congratulations on your success, but here’s my patent
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2013

In today's new media society, effective advertising often requires more than just generating innovative content. To reach potential customers, the


Court victory helps biotechs better define patents
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • September 3 2012

In a decision hailed as a victory for biotech, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the federal circuit recently ruled, for the second time, that the isolated DNA and cancer drug screening processes of a Utah-based company are patentable inventions


Bancorp Services: to patent system claims, the computer must be “integral to the invention”
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • August 2 2012

Just last week, in a post about software patents I noted that Federal Circuit decisions over the past year have applied inconsistent standards to patent-eligibility of software


Motion to compel noninfringementinvalidity contentions premature where discovery outstanding from both parties
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • September 11 2012

Magistrate Judge Lindsay of the Eastern District of New York denied as premature plaintiff's motion to compel defendant's response to contention interrogatories concerning invalidity and noninfringement defenses where plaintiff had not yet repsonded to all of defedant's discovery demands and substantial discovery remained to be exchanged between the parties, in Carson Optical, Inc. v. Prym Consumer USA, Inc


No right to jury trial for sole issue of patent validity: SDNY
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • September 14 2012

Claims for declaratory judgment concerning validity of a patent do not entitled the parties to the Seventh Amendment right for a trial by jury, the Southern District of New York held in Abbot Labs. v. Mathilda & Terence Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology Trust


USPTO issues new fee increase proposal for 2013
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • September 7 2012

On September 6, 2012, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published an updated proposal to increase its patent fees for Fiscal Year 2013


Judge Robinson grants in part and denies in part defendants' motion for judgment on pleadings in patent infringement action
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • December 8 2012

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., et el. v. Lupin Limited, et al., Civil Action No. 11-271-SLR (Consol.) (D.Del., December 7, 2012), the Court granted in part and denied in part defendants Lupin’s Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings


Judge Stark denies defendants' motion for summary judgment of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. 305
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • November 9 2012

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Exelis Inc. v. Cellco Partnership, et al., C.A. No. 09-190-LPS (D.Del., November 6, 2012), the Court issued its rulings on several motions for summary judgment and Daubert motions filed by plaintiff and defendants