Recently, a unanimous Supreme Court issued its ruling in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, holding that Amgen’s challenged patents ran afoul of Section 112’s enablement requirement.
On Friday, February 10, 2023, the latest round of amicus briefs in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi poured in. The case, set to be argued on March 27 before the U.S. Supreme Court, asks the Court to wrestle with the enablement requirement of Section 112 of the Patent Act. Specifically, the Court has been asked to…
Three years ago, the Supreme Court held in Federal Trade Comm’n v. Actavis, Inc. that pay-for-delay settlement agreements may constitute antitrust violations under the rule of reason if their anticompetitive effects are unreasonable when viewed in light of the agreements’ size, scale in relation to future litigation costs, independence from other services that might justify…
In Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, the Supreme Court held invalid under § 101 patent claims that were directed to isolated genes that could be used to test for increased risk of breast cancer. While the Court found that discovery of the genes was important and useful, “separating [the] gene from its surrounding…
Ever since the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 134 S.Ct. 2347 (2014), courts have churned out countless decisions holding patents invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for claiming unpatentable subject matter. Most of these patents have involved the application of well-known business methods by means of a computer. In those cases,…
The Ruling. In a 6-2 decision issued Tuesday, the Supreme Court once again disagreed with the Federal Circuit and held that a defendant’s good-faith (but incorrect) belief that a patent is invalid is not a defense to an induced infringement claim. Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 13-896. The Court also affirmed that induced…
The Federal Circuit has long reviewed all claim construction orders “de novo” – without any deference to factual issues underlying the district court’s decision. Today, the Supreme Court overturned that longstanding precedent, ruling that findings of fact made as part of a claim construction order should be reviewed for clear error. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et…
Last week, the Supreme Court held arguments in the closely watched case of Teva v. Sandoz. Teva won at the district court level based on claim construction arguments. The Federal Circuit reversed, affording no deference to the district courts factual findings underlying claim construction. In March, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to answer one lone…