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 Stark issues Markman opinion construing 7 terms in dispute in patent infringement action
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • December 31 2012

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Enova Technology Corporation v. Initio Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 10-04-LPS (D.Del., December 28, 2012), the


Judge Robinson denies Texas instruments' motion to transfer patent case to Northern District of Texas
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • February 15 2013

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Cradle IP, LLC v. Texas Instruments, Inc., Civil Action No. 11-1254-SLR (D.Del


Judge Andrews denies Dell's motion to transfer in Round Rock patent infringement action
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • November 30 2012

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Round Rock Research, LLC v. Dell, Inc., Civil Action No. 11-976-RGA (D.Del., November 15, 2012), the Court denied defendant Dell, Inc.’s motion to transfer the action to the Northern District of California


Federal Circuit: USPTO can overturn patent in reexamination even after a court refuses to do so
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • October 30 2012

A recent Federal Circuit decision ruled that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) may overturn a patent in a reexamination proceeding, even after a district court has refused to find the patent invalid


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”


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


Executive order declares December 24, 2012 a federal holiday
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • December 23 2012

President Obama has issued an executive order that closes all executive branch offices and agencies on Monday, December 24, 2012. For the patent and


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


Finally an answer to the question about whether the Supreme Court guidelines apply to parent coordinators appointed in counties outside of the pilot program
  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • USA
  • September 14 2012

An issue that has vexed us in the past is whether the rules enacted by the Supreme Court regarding parent coordinators were to be applied to all parent coordinators appointed by the Court