WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Delaware federal judge’s determination, following a bench trial, that two patents relating to the injectable testosterone drug Aveed are not invalid was not erroneous, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 13 (Endo Pharmaceuticals Solutions Inc., et al., v. Custopharm Inc., No. 17-1719, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 19265).
ATLANTA — Allegations by a purported inventor of an electronic reading device that Apple Inc. copied the “non-functional aesthetic look and feel” of his technical drawings submitted in conjunction with a patent application were properly dismissed by a Florida federal judge, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 12 (Thomas S. Ross v. Apple Inc., No. 17-13712, 11th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18991).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patent directed to waking a device from a low-power state in response to detected acceleration, such as when a device is moved, recites “well-known accelerometer techniques,” Samsung Electronics America Inc. asserts in a July 11 petition for inter partes review (IPR) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Samsung Electronics America Inc. v. Uniloc Luxembourg S.A., No. IPR2018-01383, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 2 reply brief, a telematics company accused of infringing four patents tells the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that “at a minimum,” it is entitled to a new trial with regard to willfulness, enhanced damages and attorney fees (Omega Patents LLC v. CalAmp Corp., No. 18-1309, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A challenge to a patented method for treating relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RR-MS) was turned away by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on July 11, in a win for patent owner Novartis A.G. (Apotex Inc., et al. v. Novartis A.G., Nos. IPR2017-00854, IPR2017-01550, IPR2017-01946 and IPR2017-01929, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on July 10 terminated a dispute between NFL Enterprises Inc. and OpenTV Inc., after the parties announced on July 6 that they have reached a settlement (NFL Enterprises Inc. v. OpenTV Inc., No. IPR2017-02092, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board applied an incorrect legal standard when determining that a patent qualifies as a covered business method (CBM), the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 11 (Apple Inc., et al., v. ContentGuard Holdings Inc., No. 16-2548, Fed. Cir.).
CHICAGO — A patent defendant’s motion for summary judgment of noninfringement and patent invalidity was largely denied June 6 by an Illinois federal judge who agreed to strike only the patent owner’s request for willful infringement damages occurring before the defendant’s CEO was notified of the patent’s existence in a phone call (Kolcraft Enterprises v. Chicco USA Inc., No. 09-3339, N.D. Ill., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112943).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a corrected opening brief filed July 5 before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson and Ericsson Inc. (Ericsson, collectively) argue that they were unfairly denied a jury trial in a declaratory judgment lawsuit that was filed in anticipation of a separate patent infringement action (Ericsson Inc., et al. v. TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd., et al., Nos. 18-1363, -1380, -1382, -1732, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patented method of treating human onychomycosis caused by Trichophyton rubrum or Trichophyton mentagrophytes with topical administration of a composition containing tavaborole would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA), Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. asserts in a July 6 petition for inter partes review by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Anacor Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. IPR2018-01358, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 9 order, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals partly granted rehearing of its May 1 ruling that vacated a $48 million disgorged profits award, and issued a modified decision affecting just one subsection pertaining to extraterritorial sales (Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America Inc., f/k/a Intersil Corporation, Nos. 2016-2121, -2208, -2235, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 6 found that although a Minnesota federal judge correctly construed the term “body” in a surgical device patent and did not err in granting a summary judgment of noninfringement, the construction also moots the issue of invalidity (Spineology Inc. v. Wright Medical Technology Inc., No. 17-2388, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18485).
HARTFORD, Conn. — A Connecticut federal judge ruled July 5 that a patent infringement case qualifies as “exceptional,” citing two defaulting defendants’ “deliberate obfuscation” of their identities in an effort to avoid detection (KX Technologies LLC v. Zuma Water Filters Inc., et al., No. 16-1433, D. Conn., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111536).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 3 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that a Texas federal magistrate judge erred in granting a patent owner a summary judgment that the on-sale bar defense is inapplicable in an infringement action (Equistar Chemicals LP, et al. v. Westlake Chemical Corporation, Nos. 2017-1548, -1549, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18294).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although upholding a judgment of infringement by a California federal judge following a jury trial, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 3 vacated a corresponding $140 million damages award that was premised on application of the entire market value rule (Power Integrations Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Inc., et al., Nos. 16-2691, 17-1875, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18177).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — On remand from a 2016 Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision vacating findings of unpatentability, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board again failed to offer a “reasoned explanation” for finding a motivation to combine prior art, the Federal Circuit ruled July 3 (PPC Broadband Inc. v. Andrei Iancu, Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Nos. 2017-1362, -1363 and -1364, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — The inventors of a method of targeting certain pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) parameters with a drug formulation extended their patent protection by eight years when they claimed an inherent property of the drug that was discovered during a routine clinical trial, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Inc. asserts in a July 2 petition for inter partes review (IPR) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Inc. v. Pozen Inc., et al., No. IPR2018-001341, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 2 order, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals agreed to remand to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board a dispute over two Nike patents covering footwear with a textile upper, without deciding the merits of the board’s final written decision following inter partes review (IPR) (adidas AG v. Nike Inc., Nos. 18-1180, -1181, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Two pharmaceutical companies embroiled in a patent dispute over a sodium chloride solution of the drug dexmedetomidine (“dex”) presented in a sealed glass container recently briefed the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on their respective positions (Hospira Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, No. 18-1522, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Delaware federal judge’s finding of nonobviousness, following a bench trial, with regard to a patented formulation of zolmitriptan nasal spray suitable for intranasal administration was affirmed June 28 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Lannett Holdings Inc., et al. v. Impax Laboratories Inc., et al., No. 17-2020, Fed. Cir.).