Category Archives: Doctrine of equivalents

Lilly’s Orange Book ‘209 patent regarding administration of pemetrexed not literally infringed, but infringed under DOE

Eli Lilly and Company v. Hospira, Inc., Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Docket No. 2018-2126, -2127, -2128 LOURIE, MOORE, TARANTO August 9, 2019 Brief Summary: DC literal infringement decision reversed, but infringement under DOE affirmed. Summary: Hospira and Dr. Reddy’s (DRL) appealed … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Doctrine of equivalents, Generics / ANDA, Infringement, Method claims, Prosecution History Estoppel, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ITC claim construction, written description, and finding of infringement by imported E. coli strains affirmed by Federal Circuit

Ajinomoto Co. et al. v. Int. Trade Commission (ITC) et al. Docket No. 2018-1590, -1629 (ITC No. 337-TA-1005) DYK (C/D), MOORE, TARANTO August 6, 2019 Brief Summary: ITC claim construction, written description, and finding that certain E. coli strains imported … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Doctrine of equivalents, Importation, Infringement, International Trade Commission, Prosecution History Estoppel, Uncategorized, Written description | Leave a comment

DC decision that Invidior’s Suboxone® sublingual film patents are infringed by certain parties and not invalid for obviousness affirmed

Invidior Inc. et al. v. Dr. Reddy’s Labs. (DRL), Actavis/Watson, Teva, Par, Intelgenx, Alvogen Pine Brook, LLC Docket Nos. 2017-2587, 2018-1010, -1058, -1062, -1114, -1115, -1176, -1177 Newman, Mayer (D), Lourie July 12, 2019 Brief Summary: DC findings that Invidior … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Doctrine of equivalents, Generics / ANDA, Obviousness, Written description | Leave a comment

Amgen, Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc. et al.

Docket Nos. 2018-1551 and -1552 LOURIE, O’MALLEY, REYNA May 8, 2019 Brief summary: DC claim construction findings and grant of SJ of non-infringement to Sandoz regarding its Neupogen® and Neulasta® biosimilars affirmed. Summary: Amgen appealed two DC decisions finding Sandoz’s … Continue reading

Posted in Biosimilars, Claim Construction, Collateral estoppel, Doctrine of equivalents, Generics / ANDA, Infringement | Leave a comment

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int., et al.

Docket No. 2016-2691, 2017-1875 DYK, CLEVENGER, CHEN July 3, 2018 (updated September 25, 2018) Update: Original opinion modified on Sept. 20, 2018 following a petition for rehearing filed by Power Integrations (PI) but the same decisions were reached (DC claim … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Damages, Doctrine of equivalents, Infringement, Royalties | Leave a comment

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int., et al.

Docket No. 2016-2691, 2017-1875 DYK, CLEVENGER, CHEN July 3, 2018 Brief summary: DC claim constructions affirmed (e.g., no prosecution history estoppel) but damages determination based on the “entire market value rule” vacated and remanded since, e.g., PI “did not meet … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Damages, Doctrine of equivalents, Infringement, Prosecution History Estoppel, Royalties | Leave a comment

Richard J. Baker v. Microsoft Corp. et al. (Nintendo of America, Inc.)

Docket No. 2017-2357 REYNA, WALLACH, HUGHES April 9, 2018 Non-precedential Brief summary: DC grant of SJ of noninfringement to MSFT et al. based on its construction of the claim term “remote” based in part on prosecution history estoppel affirmed. Summary: … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Doctrine of equivalents, Infringement, Prosecution History Estoppel, Summary Judgment | Leave a comment