Clear all

Refine your search

Tags
Territory
Jurisdiction

47 results found

Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 12 Jul 2021

Supreme Court upholds and limits assignor estoppel in patent cases

Assignor estoppel is a common law doctrine that prevents the assignor of a patent from challenging the validity of the assigned patent in district court litigation. The Supreme Court recently upheld the doctrine but limited its application to situations in which the invalidity challenge contradicts an explicit or implicit representation that the assignor made in assigning the patent.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 5 Jul 2021

Supreme Court rules on constitutionality of administrative patent judge appointments

The Supreme Court recently held that the authority wielded by administrative patent judges in inter partes review proceedings violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. The Supreme Court remedied that constitutional violation by permitting the director of the Patent and Trademark Office to directly review inter partes review decisions.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | 28 Jun 2021

New legislation requires certain patent information to be published in FDA Purple Book

Amendments to 42 US Code Section 262(k) of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act will make publication of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) "Purple Book" mandatory, and will require that it include additional information (including patent lists provided by a reference product sponsor to a biosimilar applicant) and that the FDA update it every 30 days.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 3 May 2021

Supreme Court hears oral argument on whether to abolish or modify assignor estoppel doctrine

'Assignor estoppel' is a common law doctrine that prevents, in district court patent litigation, an assignor of a patent from challenging the validity of the assigned patent as a defence to infringement allegations. The Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in a case that could limit or eliminate the doctrine of assignor estoppel and reduce the disparity between the ability of assignors......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 15 Mar 2021

Supreme Court hears argument on constitutionality of administrative patent judge appointments

The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in a case that addresses whether administrative patent judges (APJs) – who preside over inter partes reviews at the United States Patent and Trademark Office – are unconstitutionally appointed principal officers and, if so, whether that constitutional violation can be cured by severing 'for cause' employment protections for APJs.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 8 Mar 2021

Novartis prevails against motion for judgment on pleadings in Entresto patent litigation

Chief Judge Stark of the US District Court for the District of Delaware recently ruled in favour of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation against the generic defendants Torrent Pharma Inc and Torrent Pharmaceuticals. Stark denied Torrent's motion for judgment on the pleadings of non-infringement of US Patents 8,877,938 and 9,388,134, which cover Novartis's Entresto product and its approved use.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 9 Nov 2020

Can inter partes review petitions be denied as cumulative of previously presented art and arguments?

In March 2020 the Precedential Opinion Panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated as precedential an opinion which sets out a two-part inquiry for determining when the PTAB can deny institution of inter partes review proceedings under 35 US Code 325(d) as duplicative of art and arguments previously presented in patent prosecution. The PTAB director's determination to......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 12 Oct 2020

Supreme Court rules that inter partes review time-bar determinations are not appealable

The Supreme Court recently ruled by a seven-to-two majority that determinations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of whether to apply the time bar of 35 US Code 315(b) to inter partes review proceedings are not appealable. In so doing, the Supreme Court effectively abrogated the Federal Circuit's en banc decision that such determinations are appealable.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 3 Aug 2020

Federal Circuit to amend rules for appeals in patent cases

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently adopted several amendments to its rules of practice, which govern procedural aspects of appeals from district court patent cases and appeals from Patent Trial and Appeal Board proceedings. These amendments apply to all appeals filed or pending on or after 1 July 2020, to the extent practicable, unless otherwise ordered.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Venable LLP | USA | 20 Jan 2020

Supreme Court prohibits USPTO from shifting attorneys' fees in certain district court proceedings

The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that the US Patent and Trademark Office cannot shift the fees of its attorneys and paralegals to litigants in district court proceedings brought under Title 35, Section 145 of the US Code. Justice Sotomayor explained that, under the centuries-old presumption commonly known as the 'American rule', each litigant pays its own attorneys' fees "win or lose,......
Previous page 1 2 3 4 5