Walker Process antitrust claim reinstated: threats to sue competitor’s customers sufficient In Hydril Co. v. Grant Prideco, Inc., the Federal Circuit reinstated a Walker Process antitrust claim the lower court had dismissed. A Walker Process claim can arise when a patent holder, knowing that its patent was obtained through fraud, still attempts to enforce the patent. This type of claim is named after the Supreme Court […] Continue Reading →
“Critical” ratio in claim does not get the benefit of the doctrine of equivalents Today’s lesson from the Federal Circuit: be careful not to make a claim limitation “critical,” or you may lose the benefit of the doctrine of equivalents for that element. The court found that the claimed weight ratio of two drugs was critical in part because other claims recited a range of ratios, but the claim […] Continue Reading →
Roundup of media coverage of “MedImmune v. Genentech” decision After last week's Supreme Court decision in MedImmune v. Genentech holding a patent licensee in good standing need not breach the license agreement in order to bring a claim that the patent is invalid, not infringed, or unenforceable, the media has begun to offer its perspective on the case. Below is a sampling of the […] Continue Reading →
Limitations of a Claim Come from the Claim Language Itself In E-Pass Technologies (“E-Pass”) v. 3Com Corp., Palm Inc., palmOne, Inc. and Handspring, Inc. and Visa International Service Association and Visa U.S.A., Inc. and Palmsource, Inc. (“3Com”), the district court’s holding of final summary judgment of non-infringement by 3Com was affirmed by the Federal Circuit. At issue was a patent (“the ‘311 patent”) entitled “Method […] Continue Reading →
“Bare Licensee” Lacks Standing to Sue for Infringement In Propat International Corp & David Find and Helene Glasser (“Propat”) v. RPsot International Limted, Zafar Khan, Kenneth Barton and Terrance Tomkow (“Rpost”), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that Propat lacked standing to sue for infringement and, on the cross-appeal, affirmed the district court’s order denying RPost’s request for an award of […] Continue Reading →
Supreme Court: patent licensee need not cease royalty payments to challenge patent’s vaildity Today the Supreme Court decided MedImmune v. Genentech, a case about the power of federal courts to decide issues related to patent infringement and validity when one party to the dispute is currently licensing the patent from the other party. In an 8-1 decision, the Court held that a licensee need not stop paying royalties, […] Continue Reading →
Speculation not required: IP litigation in 2006 produced $3.4 billion Contrary to the statement in the previous post, apparently speculation is not required to determine the amount of money that changed hands as a result of intellectual property litigation in 2006. According to a survey [subscription required to view full story] by IP Law 360, intellectual property litigation resulted in a combined $3.4 billion in […] Continue Reading →
Patent cases in 2006 result in over $1 billion in damages awarded According to a study released by Bloomberg, United States juries in patent cases awarded a total of over $1 billion in damages in cases that went to jury trial in 2006, the largest single year ever. The largest award went to Rambus, a California maker of computer memory chips, who won a $307 million verdict […] Continue Reading →
Working until the end of the year, Federal Circuit addresses a Law School Exam Type Case The Federal Circuit affirmed a Southern District of Indiana decision that generic drug makers IVAX Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Dr. Reddy’s Labratories, Ltd. (DRL) and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. infringed Eli Lilly and Company’s (Lilly) U.S. Patent no. 5,229,382. The ‘382 Patent claims chemical compound olanzapine and the use of the compound to treat schizophrenia. The infringers […] Continue Reading →
New GAO report suggests that some patents may hamper development of new “innovative” drugs A report released by the Government Accountability Office indicates that while expenditures on research and development by drug companies have increased, this has not resulted in a commensurate increase in new drug applications (NDAs) with the FDA. In fact, NDAs have decreased by 21% from 1999 to 2004. The larger concern raised by the report […] Continue Reading →