Monthly Archives: May 2018

Ericsson Inc. et al. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC

Docket No. 2016-1671 (IPR2014-00963) PROST, NEWMAN, WALLACH (D) May 29, 2018 Brief summary: PTAB IPR decision finding IV’s claims relating to “frequency hopping” in wireless systems not to be invalid for anticipation or obviousness reversed and remanded. Summary: Ericsson appealed … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness | Leave a comment

UCB, Inc. et al. v Accord Healthcare et al.

Docket No. 2017-1909, -1910 REYNA, CLEVENGER, WALLACH May 21, 2018 Brief summary: DC decision of no invalidity of UCB’s OB claims covering the anti-epileptic Vimpat® affirmed. Summary: Accord appealed DC decision that UCB’s RE38,551 covering the anti-epileptic functionalized amino acid … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Double Patenting, Generics / ANDA, Obviousness | Leave a comment

D Three Enterprises, LLC v. Sunmodo Corp. / Rillito River Solar LLC (EcoFasten)

Docket No. 2017-1909, -1910 REYNA, CLEVENGER, WALLACH May 21, 2018 Brief summary: DC decision of invalidity for lack of written description (WD) affirmed because, e.g., “adequate [WD] does not ask what is permissible, rather, it asks what is disclosed” (Ariad, … Continue reading

Posted in Priority, Written description | Leave a comment

Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Grunenthal GmbH v. Teva Pharm. USA, et al.

Docket No. 2015-2021(22 others) MOORE, BRYSON, HUGHES May 16, 2018 Non-precedential Brief summary: DC findings that the proposed ANDA of Endo’s OPANA®ER infringe the claims, and that those claims are not invalid for obviousness or indefiniteness, affirmed. Summary: Teva et … Continue reading

Posted in Generics / ANDA, Indefiniteness, Infringement, Injunction, Obviousness | Leave a comment

SAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC

Docket No. 2017-2081 LOURIE, O’MALLEY, TARANTO May 15, 2018 Brief summary: DC grant of SJ to SAP finding the asserted claims patent ineligible under § 101 affirmed (e.g., “not a physical-realm improvement but an improvement in wholly abstract ideas”). Summary: … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Altaire Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Paragon Bioteck, Inc.

Docket No. 2017-1487 (PGR2015-00011) O’MALLEY, SCHALL (D), WALLACH May 2, 2018 Brief summary: PTAB FWD after PRG of Paragon’s patent relating to the use of chirally pure R-phenylephrine in ophthalmic compositions reversed-in-part, vacated-in-part, and remanded. Summary: Altaire appealed PTAB final … Continue reading

Posted in Article III disputes, Obviousness, Post-grant review | Leave a comment

AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Inc. v. Gilead Sciences, Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2016-2475 MOORE, REYNA, TARANTO May 11, 2018 Brief summary: DC dismissal of AHF’s request for DJ for not relating to a current “substantial controversy” affirmed. Summary: AHF appealed DC dismissal of its request for a declaratory judgment (DJ) … Continue reading

Posted in Article III disputes, Inducement to Infringe | Leave a comment