CAFC Opinion No. 2023-1176, 2023-1177, Decided December 9, 2024 (Chen, Mayer, Cunningham; Precedential) Overview: The “evolution” of the intended meaning of a claim term and unintended consequences of modifying provisional application content. Facts/Background DDR Holdings sued Priceline.com and Booking.com for patent infringement in District of Delaware. The patent at issue concerns a method of generating […]
Federal Circuit 2024-1664 December 04, 2024 (Moore, Linn, Prost) Summary: The Federal Circuit upheld the District of Delaware’s ruling that Lupin’s abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) for a delayed release generic did not infringe Galderma’s patent on the delayed release formulation under the doctrine of equivalents. This decision was made despite an FDA determination of […]
Federal Circuit 2023-2074, etc. December 4, 2024 (Prost, Taranto, Hughes) Summary: First, the Federal Circuit upheld the PTAB’s decision that 79 claims are unpatentable as obvious, determining that a lead compound analysis was not required where the claimed compounds were explicitly suggested. Second, the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination that 4 process claims were […]
Case No. 22-1815, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Oct. 24, 2024) Reyna, Taranto, Chen Facts/Background: Nextstep sued Comcast alleging patent infringement of the ’009 patent which is directed to a “concierge device” that offers a streamlined approach for initiating technical customer support. Specifically, a device that initiates technical support in response to only “a single action” of […]
Case No. 23-1435, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Oct. 18, 2024) Prost, Taranto, Hughes Facts/Background: UTTO sued Metrotech for infringing its patents directed to a process for detecting and identifying “buried assets” District court construed the phrase “group” in the patent claim language to require “two or more,” adopting that construction as reflecting the “ordinary and customary […]
Case No. 22-2036, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Oct. 8, 2024) Lourie, Bryson, Stark Facts/Background: AlexSam sued Aetna for infringement of the ’608 patent. Alleged that Aetna marketed Mastercard and VISA products which infringed the ’608 relating to debit/credit card technology. AlexSam and Mastercard had previously entered into a licensing agreement for that patent authorizing Mastercard to […]
Case No. 24-1398, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Sep. 16, 2024) Moore, Prost, Mazzant Facts/Background: Vascular Solutions sued Medtronic for patent infringement. Patent claims a cardiac catheter device with a side opening and a substantially rigid portion/segment. Some claims include the side opening as part of the substantially rigid portion/segment Other claims recite the side opening as […]
Case No. 23-2032, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Sep. 18, 2024) Lourie, Prost, Reyna Facts/Background: Astellas sued Sandoz for patent infringement. Sandoz agreed to limit its invalidity defenses to only 35 U.S.C. 112. None of the parties brought up § 101 at all. But the district court used § 101 to find the claims invalid, sua sponte. […]
Case No. 22-2160, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Oct. 3, 2024) Reyna, Cunningham, Albright Facts/Background: Crocs sued Dawgs for patent infringement. Dawgs counterclaimed for false advertising under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act. Crocs falsely described its “Croslite” material as “patented.” Dawgs alleges that this was an attempt to mislead customers to believe that Crocs are made […]
Case No. 23-1438, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Oct. 2, 2024) Moore, Taranto, Cecchi Facts/Background: Provisur sued Weber, alleging that Weber’s “SmartLoader” infringed the ’936 patent. Jury trial (W.D. Mo) found willful infringement. Weber moved for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) and a new trial, but the district court denied both motions. Issues: Infringement: if […]