fbpx

Top Rated

Good-Faith Belief of Invalidity May Negate Induced Infringement

As early as the1990 decision in Manville Sales Corp. v. Paramount Sys. Inc., 917 F.3d 544 (Fed. Cir. 1990), the Federal Circuit applied a standard that encompasses negligence in determining whether the defendant violated 35 U.S.C. § 271 (b), prohibiting active inducement of infringement. Under this standard, if the alleged infringer knew or should have …

Good-Faith Belief of Invalidity May Negate Induced Infringement Read More »

ANDA Litigation and Reverse Payments

In Federal Trade Commission v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 133 S. Ct. 787 (2012), the Supreme Court held that reverse payments in pharmaceuticals patent settlement are not categorically immune from the antitrust laws even if such payments fall within the scope of the patent. Often, reverse payments are made by a pioneer drug manufacturer to a generic …

ANDA Litigation and Reverse Payments Read More »

Standard of Review Changes for Freeze-Out Mergers

On May 29, 2013, the Delaware Chancery Court, in its landmark decision of In re MFW Shareholders Litigation (MFW), held that the “deferential business judgment rule” is the correct standard of review for freeze-out mergers, as opposed to the more rigorous “entire fairness standard.” This decision requires that a freeze-out merger, from the inception of merger negotiations, …

Standard of Review Changes for Freeze-Out Mergers Read More »

RAND Obligations and Injunctive Relief

Entities that are parts of technology standard-setting organizations are typically required to promise, in some fashion, to license patents essential to any resultant standard on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms. Once the standard has been promulgated, the standard essential patents (“SEP”s) may be asserted in litigation and the patent holder is expected to live up to …

RAND Obligations and Injunctive Relief Read More »

About When Exclusive Patent Licensees Can Sue on their Licensed Patent

In WiAV Solutions LLC v. Motorola, Inc., No. 10-1266 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 22, 2010), the Federal Circuit broadened the scope of exclusive license by holding that “a licensee is an exclusive licensee of a patent if it holds any of the exclusionary rights that accompany a patent.” The licensing rights at issue were held by …

About When Exclusive Patent Licensees Can Sue on their Licensed Patent Read More »

The Federal Circuit Rules on Apple v. ITC

On August 7, 2013, the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part the lower court’s decision in Apple Inc. v. ITC (2012-1338) finding no Section 337 violation in Certain Mobile Devices, and Related Software Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-750). The Federal Circuit ruled that Apple’s U.S. Patent No. 7,663,607, which related to a touch panel with a transparent capacitive sensing …

The Federal Circuit Rules on Apple v. ITC Read More »

YouTube
LinkedIn
LinkedIn
Share