Essential Patent Blog

Essential Patent Blog

The Source for Standard-Essential and Other Patent Litigation Issues

Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Patent Case: Supreme Court to review appellate standard for reviewing district court claim construction (Teva v. Sandoz)

Posted in Appeals, Litigation, Patent Alerts
Today, in Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition seeking review of the Federal Circuit’s de novo standard of review of a district court’s claim construction ruling.  Teva phrased the question presented as follows: QUESTION PRESENTED Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that in matters tried … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rules that Burden to Show Infringement in Declaratory Judgment Action for Non-Infringement Remains with Patentee

Posted in Appeals, Court Orders, District Courts, Litigation
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Medtronic, Inv. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC, unanimously reversing the Federal Circuit’s decision below and resolving two issues that are commonly disputed in the lower courts.  First, the Court held that the Federal Circuit had subject-matter jurisdiction over an appeal of an action for a declaratory judgment for … Continue Reading

Recent Supreme Court grant of petition for certiorari may have implications for standard-essential patent disputes (Medtronic v. Boston Scientific)

Posted in Appeals, Litigation, Patent Alerts
Back in September 2012, we posted a Patent Alert on the Federal Circuit’s decision in Medtronic v. Boston Scientific. In that case, the court held that in an action where a licensee in good standing seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement (so any counterclaim for infringement would be foreclosed by the existence of the license), … Continue Reading

RANDomness

Posted in RANDomness
Shameless plug alert – this past Friday saw us quoted in media reports about patent litigation: The Wall Street Journal‘s article “ITC Clears Microsoft’s Xbox in Patent Case,” which discussed recent goings-on in the Motorola-Microsoft ITC case, featured a quote from David Long.  You may recall that this case, which is part of the worldwide … Continue Reading

RANDomness – Patent day at the Supreme Court

Posted in RANDomness
Yesterday was quite the day for patent-related issues at the Supreme Court.  The Court held oral arguments in Bowman v. Monsanto, where the justices are tasked with deciding whether the patent exhaustion doctrine extends to self-replicating technologies (here, Monsanto’s patented Roundup Ready soybeans).  For more info on these cases, see these recaps from Patently-O and … Continue Reading

RANDomness

Posted in RANDomness, Uncategorized
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that in the wake of a couple of large damages awards in patent infringement cases brought by universities, more higher education institutions are beginning to think about flexing their IP muscles. (via The Blog of Legal Times) On February 19, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Bowman v. Monsanto, a … Continue Reading

RANDomness

Posted in RANDomness
Last week, the United States Supreme Court handed down its unanimous opinion in Already, LLC v. Nike (No. 11-982).  The Court held that Nike’s issuance of a broad covenant not to sue on one of its trademarks extinguished Already’s standing to its counterclaim for invalidity of Nike’s trademark.  While this case involved trademarks, not patents, the Court’s … Continue Reading

Patent Alert: Supreme Court rules district court hearing appeal from PTO may consider new evidence and make de novo fact finding (Kappos v. Hyatt)

Posted in Patent Alerts
Today, Wed., Apr. 18, 2012, in Kappos v. Hyatt, No. 10-1219, the Supreme Court (Thomas) (Sotomayor and Breyer concur) affirmed the Federal Circuit’s ruling that permits new evidence in an appeal to a district court under Section 145 from an adverse Patent Office ruling on a patent application… Continue Reading

Patent Alert: Supreme Court rules drug administration process unpatentable because it simply applied law of nature to otherwise conventional drug treatment procedures (Mayo v. Prometheus)

Posted in Patent Alerts
Yesterday, Tues., Mar. 20, 2012, in Mayo Collaborative Svcs v. Prometheus Labs, No. 10-1150, the Supreme Court (Breyer) unanimously reversed the Federal Circuit and ruled that a claimed process for assessing proper drug dosage was unpatentable under Section 101 because it was broadly directed to simply applying a law of nature in otherwise conventional drug treatment … Continue Reading
.