Category Archives: comprising

DC ineligibility finding regarding “computer-readable” medium reversed, claim construction affirmed

Posted on April 27, 2023 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Sequoia Technology, LLC v. Dell, Inc., et al. (Red Hat, IBM) Docket No. 2021-2263-67 (https://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/21-2263.OPINION.4-12-2023_2109603.pdf) LOURIE, DYK, STOLL April 12, 2023 Brief Summary:   DC patent ineligibility decision regarding “computer-readable” medium limitation reversed; claim construction affirmed. Summary:  Sequoia appealed judgment … Continue reading →

Posted in Claim Construction, comprising, consisting of, Inter Parties Review (IPR), Patent Eligibility (101), Patentability, Prosecution History Estoppel, Section 101 (see also Patentability), Software | Leave a comment

Horizon’s petition for en banc rehearing regarding indefiniteness denied (four judges dissented regarding “consisting essentially of”))

Posted on February 26, 2020 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

HZNP Medicines LLC et al. v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. Docket No. 2017-2149, -2152-53, -2202-3, -2206 PROST, NEWMAN, REYNA October 10, 2019 (update Feb. 25, 2020) Update (2/25/20): Petition for en banc hearing denied. Judges Lourie, Newman, O’Malley and Stoll … Continue reading →

Posted in comprising, consisting of, Generics / ANDA, Indefiniteness | Leave a comment