Ineffective Skinny Label Leaves Generic Liable Despite Effort to Carve Out the Patented Indication In Glaxosmithkline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals Usa, Inc., Appeal No. 18-1976, the Federal Circuit held that substantial evidence supported the jury verdict of induced infringement when testimony indicated that a generic failed to carve out a... read more →

The Obviousness of Preamble Limitations Can be a Real Headache for Patent Challengers In Eli Lilly And Company v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, Appeal No. 20-1876, the Federal Circuit held that in claims for methods of using apparatuses or compositions, statements of intended purpose in a preamble tend to be limiting. Lilly... read more →

Authentication of Prior Art in an IPR Does Not Require Testimony In Valve Corporation v. Ironburg Inventions Ltd.,Appeal No. 20-1315, the Federal Circuit held that for purposes of authenticating a prior art reference in IPR proceedings, the Board had an obligation to compare the reference to nearly identical copies in the... read more →

A Preamble That Saves May Be a Preamble That Limits In Data Engine Technologies LLC v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 21-1050, the Federal Circuit held that a patentee that relies on language in the preamble to successfully argue that its claims are directed to patent-eligible subject matter cannot later assert... read more →

Federal Circuit Finds No Constitutional Defect in Appointment of TTAB Judges   In Piano Factory Group, Inc. v. Schiedmayer Celesta GmbH, Appeal No. 20-1196, the Federal Circuit held that the appointments of TTAB judges do not share the constitutional defect that the Supreme Court remedied for PTAB judges in Arthrex.... read more →

The Location of Witnesses and Relevant Evidence Still Reigns Supreme in Venue Decisions In In Re: Juniper Networks, Inc., Appeal No. 21-160, the Federal Circuit held that a party’s general presence in a forum is an insufficient reason to deny transfer when the majority of witnesses and relevant evidence are... read more →

Venue and Pleading Infringement in Hatch-Waxman Litigation Turn on Location and Identity of ANDA Filer In Celgene Corp. v. Mylan Pharm. et al., Appeal No. 21-1154, the Federal Circuit held that in Hatch-Waxman litigation: (1) infringement occurs where the ANDA is submitted and not where the patentee receives notice of... read more →

Be Careful What You Agree To:  Incorporated Rules Clearly and Unmistakably Delegate Determining Arbitrability In Rohm Semiconductor USA, LLC v. Maxpower Semiconductor, Inc., Appeal No. 21-1709, the Federal Circuit held that an arbitration agreement, which incorporated the California Code of Civil Procedure by reference, delegated determining arbitrability and supported dismissal... read more →