Novartis panel did not discuss full-scope written description requirement or attempt to distinguish Chiron decision. In any event, another example of why patent defendants should always consider the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents whenever arguing written description or enablement defense, ...

Teva Branded (Fed. Cir. 12/20/24) (affirming judgment delisting Teva patents from Orange Book where NDA product is combination of “albuterol sulfate (the active ingredient) with a propellant, ethanol, and an inhaler device to administer the drug” but ...

Big day for generics at Federal Circuit. Teva Branded (Fed. Cir. 12/20/24) (affirming judgment delisting Teva patents from Orange Book where NDA product is combination of “albuterol sulfate (the active ingredient) with a propellant, ethanol, and an inhaler device to administer the drug” but ...

EcoFactor v. Google En Banc Review in Federal Circuit: Today, Court reiterated that review is limited to gatekeeping expert opinion converting lump sum license payments to a per-unit royalty, and ordered that EcoFactor should not respond to portion of Google brief on damages apportionment law.

9 Yrs. ago: IPR statute upheld. MCM Portfolio (Fed. Cir. 12/02/15) (IPR statute Constitutional; Congress “saw powerful reasons to utilize the expertise of the PTO for an important public purpose—to correct the agency’s own errors in issuing patents in the first place.”).

8 yrs. ago: Cannot patent function without reciting how performed. Apple (Ameranth) (Fed. Cir. 11/29/16) (“They do not claim a particular way of programming or designing the software to create menus that have these features, but instead merely claim the resulting systems.”)

EcoFactor-Google En Banc review of reasonable royalty (RR) patent damages. 18 Amici briefs filed this week in favor of Google or neither party. Most urge stronger gatekeeping by trial judges of expert testimony, including whether earlier license agreements are "comparable"

Today: Fed. Cir. affirms Summ. J. no infringement: Claim: "system begins transmission to the remote client device of at least one of the audio or video of the pet in response to input from the pet." Accused device: Pet action triggers notice to user; user click triggers audio/video of pet.

10 years ago: Ultramercial III (Fed. Cir. 11/14/14) (aff’g motion to dismiss for ineligibility, despite previously finding same claims eligible post-Mayo but pre-Alice). Alice decision has invalidated 1000s of patent claims that previously would have survived. Will new Congress overturn Alice?

Patent system could be used to put a price on carbon. Perhaps Bluesky community could help make this happen. Like to hear how?

79 years ago: A device described in an expired patent (even if a third-party’s expired patent) cannot infringe. Scott Paper (U.S. 11/13/1945). Still good law, most patent litigators overlook.

101 yrs. ago: Supreme Court found patent unenforceable based on 9½-year prosecution delay. Woodbridge (U.S. 11/12/1923). See klarquist.com/patent-defen...

We're a free legal research tool on substantive U.S. utility patent law with more than 5K links to Fed. Cir. and S. Ct. decisions, started in 2004 and updated about weekly by Klarquist. www.patentdefenses.com. Happy to be joining Bluesky!