The Supreme Court unanimously held last week in Amgen v. Sanofi that a patent’s specification must enable a person skilled in the art to make and use the full scope of the invention as defined by its claims. Amgen sued Sanofi in 2014, alleging that Sanofi had infringed its cholesterol-lowering drug patents, which disclosed 26 […]
By Daniel M. Staren and David G. Barker The Federal Circuit recently denied a mandamus petition seeking relief from a district court order denying a motion to dismiss a patent case for improper venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Bel Power Solutions, Inc. sued Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. in the Western District of Texas for selling power modules that […]
By Daniel M. Staren and David G. Barker The Supreme Court held today that lack of knowledge of either fact or law can excuse inaccuracies in a copyright registration under Section 411(b)’s safe harbor provision of the Copyright Act. Unicolors created fabric designs but did not publish them at the same time. Later, in February […]
By Daniel M. Staren and David G. Barker Last week, a Federal Circuit panel vacated a billion dollar jury verdict in favor of plaintiff-appellee California Institute of Technology (“Caltech”) and remanded for a new trial on damages because of Caltech’s unsupported two-tiered reasonable royalty patent damages theory. Caltech sued Broadcom, Apple, and others in the […]
By Anne Bolamperti and David G. Barker The Federal Circuit invalidated Juno Therapeutics, Inc.’s T cell therapy patent for cancer treatment and erased a billion dollar judgment in Juno’s favor. The court held that the jury verdict regarding the patent’s written description under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) was not supported by substantial evidence. Juno’s U.S. Patent No. […]
By Daniel M. Staren and David G. Barker The Supreme Court held this week that the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) appointment of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) judges cannot be constitutionally enforced because the USPTO director does not have authority to review final PTAB decisions. Smith & Nephew, Inc. and ArthroCare […]
By Daniel M. Staren and David G. Barker The Federal Circuit’s recent decisions in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC have not clarified the standard for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (see a previous analysis of § 101’s unpredictability here). In this case, significant differences among Federal Circuit judges turned […]
By Daniel M. Staren and David G. Barker Today a unanimous Supreme Court struck down the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act of 1990 (“CRCA”), which sought to expose States to copyright infringement suits. See 17 U.S.C. § 511(a). The Court’s decision in Allen v. Cooper affirmed a Fourth Circuit decision holding that neither Congress’s Article I […]
By Daniel M. Staren and David G. Barker The Supreme Court unanimously held that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) may not recover the salaries of its legal personnel as “expenses” in a civil action challenging an adverse decision by the PTO under the Patent Act. The Court’s decision in Peter v. NantKwest […]
