Gilead Defeats Federal Government Lawsuit Alleging Patent Infringement for HIV Prevention Drugs

By Julie L. Spieker

On Tuesday, May 9, 2023, a jury found that Gilead did not infringe on three patents held by the federal government, and furthermore, that the patents at issue are invalid. The government was seeking more than $1 billion in damages related to the sale of Truvada and Descovy for an HIV prevention regimen call pre-exposure […]

Federal Circuit Confirms “Known-Technique” Rationale as an Indicator of a Motivation to Combine

By Joseph M. Hallman

In KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 419 (2007) (“KSR”) the U.S. Supreme Court criticized rigid application of the so-called “teaching, suggestion, or motivation” test (“the TSM test”) which, prior to KSR, had often been applied by courts when determining obviousness of patent claims. Under the TSM test, “a patent claim is […]

Federal Circuit reiterates holding regarding errors in prior art references

By Joseph M. Hallman

On July 11, 2022, in LG Electronics Inc. v. ImmerVision, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) affirmed the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) final written decisions in two inter partes reviews (“IPR”) wherein it was held that LG Electronics Inc. (“LG”) failed to show that the challenged […]

Federal Circuit clarifies the “teaches away” doctrine and the “substantial evidence” requirement when making an obviousness determination

By Joseph M. Hallman

On July 22, 2021, in Chemours Company FC, LLC v. Daikin Industries, Ltd. (“Chemours v. Daikin”), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) reversed a decision made by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). In two inter partes reviews (“IPRs”) filed by Daikin Industries, Ltd. (“Daikin”), the PTAB held […]

Federal Circuit reiterates the principle that when a § 103 rejection is based on a single prior art reference, the reference must be self-enabling in order to render the claimed invention obvious

By Joseph M. Hallman

On April 16, 2021, in Raytheon Technologies Corp. v. General Electric Co., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) reversed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) regarding unpatentability due to obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. In its decision, the Federal Circuit made clear that when […]

Federal Circuit Reinstates Patent Claims Previously Found Obvious by Patent Trial and Appeal Board

By Julie L. Spieker

On July 31, 2020, in the precedential opinion Alacritech, Inc. v. Intel Corp., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (hereinafter the “Federal Circuit”) reinstated three claims of Alacritech’s patent, holding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (hereinafter the “Board”) did not adequately support its finding that the asserted prior art […]

Non-obviousness: when failure equals success

A recent Federal Circuit Court decision demonstrates that evidence of prior failures to achieve desired results can be potent evidence of lack of predictability in a field, resulting in the non-obviousness of using a compound to treat a specific cancer, even though the drug target was identified as effective in a test tube. The decision, […]

Meet DABUS: An Artificial Intelligence Machine Hoping to Maintain Two Patent Applications in its own Name

By Blog Staff

Three patent offices face questions stemming from the growing implications of artificial intelligence (AI) disrupting the intellectual property legal framework. The United States Patent Office (USPTO), European Patent Office (EPO), and United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) recently received two patent application filings directed to a beverage container and a flashing device used for attracting […]

First Cannabis-Related Patent Makes its Way through the Federal Courts: What it Teaches, and What it Does Not

By Blog Staff

In the past 25 years, there has been substantial growth surrounding the developments within the cannabis industry, particularly involving intellectual property protections. With legalization of cannabis gaining traction across the United States, any court guidance can provide a foundation for those seeking patent protection. Opportunely, on April 17, 2019, The District Court for the District […]

CRISPR: Broad Institute Holds onto its Piece of Pie, and it’s Delicious!

On Monday, September 10th, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) upheld the decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) on the interference between the Broad Institute and the University of California. The PTAB held, and the CAFC upheld, that given the difference between prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, one skilled in […]