Monthly Archives: July 2022

DC denial of Thales’ motion to enjoin Philips’ ITC exclusion order as Thales did not show it was likely to suffer irreparable harm affirmed

Koninklijke Philips N.V. et al. v. Thales DIS AIS USA LLC, et al. Docket No. 2021-2106 ( MOORE, DYK, CHEN July 13, 2022 Brief Summary:   DC denial of Thales motion to enjoin Philips from seeking ITC exclusion order affirmed … Continue reading

Posted in Infringement, International Trade Commission, Software | Leave a comment

DC grant of SJ to Ford vacated and remanded for erroneous claim construction

Ethanol Boosting System, LLC (MIT) v. Ford Motor Company Docket No. 2021-1949 ( (Non-precedential) MOORE, NEWMAN (D), HUGHES July 18, 2022 Brief Summary:   DC grant of SJ vacated and remanded due faulty claim construction. Summary: EBS appealed DC order granting … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction | Leave a comment

DC finding of Stanford’s organ rejection detection claims ineligible under section 101 affirmed

CareDx, Inc. (Stanford Univ.) v. Natera, Inc. and Eurofins Viracor, Inc. Docket Nos. 2022-1027-8 ( LOURIE, BRYSON, HUGHES July 18, 2022 Brief Summary:   Stanford’s claims to detecting organ rejection found ineligible under section 101 (e.g., “applying standard techniques in … Continue reading

Posted in Method claims, Patent Eligibility (101), Patentability, Section 101 (see also Patentability) | Leave a comment

DC finding Actavis did not show Tris’ liquid formulation/blood concentration claims obvious affirmed

Tris Pharma, Inc. v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc. Docket No. 2021-1495 ( (Non-precedential) MOORE, CHEN, HUGHES July 7, 2022 Brief Summary:   DC decision following remand finding Actavis did not show Tris’ claims obvious affirmed (e.g., “unexpected result”, long-felt unmet … Continue reading

Posted in Generics / ANDA, Obviousness, Obviousness (Secondary Considerations), Obviousness-Teaching Away | Leave a comment