Monthly Archives: February 2019

University of Florida Res. Found., Inc. (UFRF) v. General Electric Co. et al.

Posted on February 28, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2018-1284 PROST, MOORE, WALLACH February 26, 2019 Brief summary: UFRF found to have “waived sovereign immunity as to GE’s § 101 eligibility challenge”. DC grant of GE’s motion to dismiss based on its § 101 defense to infringement … Continue reading →

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi, Regeneron et al. (Feb. 25, 2019 Update)

Posted on February 27, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2017-1480 PROST, TARANTO, HUGHES October 5, 2017 Update (Feb. 25, 2019): DC jury verdict (Case No. 1:14-cv-01317-RGA) found ‘165 claims 7 and 15 (“binds to at least D238” or “V380”, respectively) enabled but lacking written description; ‘165 claims … Continue reading →

Posted in Enablement, Written description | Leave a comment

CODA Development S.R.O. et al. and Frantisek Hrabal (“Coda”) v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., et al.

Posted on February 26, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2018-1028 PROST, WALLACH, HUGHES February 22, 2019 Brief summary: DC dismissal of Coda’s complaint seeking correction of inventorship (§ 256) of several Goodyear patents and applications, and trade secret misappropriation claims as time barred, was vacated and remanded. … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventorship, Trade Secret | Leave a comment

Centrak, Inc. v. Sonitor Technologies, Inc.

Posted on February 18, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2017-2510 REYNA, TARANTO, CHEN February 14, 2019 Brief summary: DC grant of SJ for invalidity for lack of WD and non-infringement reversed and remanded (e.g., “a reasonable jury could find that…Sonitor personnel complete at least a portion of … Continue reading →

Posted in Infringement, Written description | Leave a comment

Continental Circuits LLC v. Intel Corporation, et al.

Posted on February 14, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2018-1076 LOURIE, LINN, TARANTO February 8, 2019 Brief summary: DC judgment that Intel did not infringe CC’s asserted patents vacated and remanded due to DC’s erroneous claim construction (e.g., no clear disavowel of claim scope). Summary: CC appealed … Continue reading →

Posted in Claim Construction, Prosecution History Estoppel | Leave a comment

Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company

Posted on February 11, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2017-1694 (IPR2015-01537) NEWMAN, DYK, CHEN February 7, 2019 Brief summary: Momenta’s appeal of PTAB FWD finding BMS’s claims relating to its Orencia CTLA4Ig product patentable dismissed as moot because evidence showed Momenta had abandoned its Orencia biosimilar project … Continue reading →

Posted in Article III disputes, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR | Leave a comment

Athena Diagnostics, Inc. et al. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC

Posted on February 7, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2017-2508 NEWMAN (D), LOURIE, STOLL February 6, 2019 Brief summary: DC finding that method claims relating to a correlation between antibodies to a protein (“MuSK”) and neurological disorders are invalid under § 101 affirmed. Summary: Athena (as exclusive … Continue reading →

Posted in Patentability | Leave a comment

Supernus Pharm., Inc. et al. v. Andrei Iancu (USPTO)

Posted on February 5, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2017-1357 DYK, SCHALL, REYNA January 23, 2019 Brief summary: DC grant of SJ to the USPTO regarding calculation of the PTA for Supernus’s patent reversed and remanded since Supernus could not have engaged in “reasonable efforts” to disclose … Continue reading →

Posted in America Invents Act, Patent Term Adjustment (PTA), Patent Term Extension | Leave a comment