This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
On May 20, 2022, the Competition Bureau announced that it closed two investigations into pharmaceutical patentlitigationsettlement agreements as evidence gathered during the two investigations suggested the agreements did not contravene the Competition Act. The parties and drugs involved were not identified.
In 2013, the United States Supreme Court significantly changed the landscape of patentsettlements in the pharmaceutical industry with its FTC v. Actavis, Inc.
This chart summarizes the case name, drug, patents-in-suit, and publicly available terms for reported settlements in federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. By: Robins Kaplan LLP
Litigation funder Longford Capital has asked a Delaware federal court to send its dispute over a settlement with Arigna Technology Ltd. to arbitration, saying the arbitration agreement between the two parties is valid despite the Irish patent holding company's claims otherwise.
Litigation is almost always recommended to be avoided , whether because of the sheer amount of time needed to get a court date, the expensive costs for the client and law firm, or the risks associated with receiving an unfavorable judgement. They do not practice, develop, manufacture, or otherwise commercialize the patent.
This chart summarizes the case name, drug, patents-in-suit, and publicly available terms for reported settlements in federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. By: Robins Kaplan LLP
On appeal, the CAFC held that CNC’s version of the agreement more accurately reflected the understanding between the two parties regarding a settlement over Plasmacam’s claim that CNC infringed U.S. 7,071,441 (‘441 patent), for which Plasmacam has an exclusive license.
This chart summarizes the case name, drug, patents-in-suit, and publicly available terms for reported settlements in federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. By: Robins Kaplan LLP
With an average 33 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) filings (one post grant review, the rest inter partes reviews[IPRs]), a relatively high number (89) of district court terminations (including some high-profile settlements), and a somewhat low number (63) of suits this week, we are rolling into May.
Patentlitigators who represent plaintiffs and defendants agree the new standing order favours the defence, but one litigation financier predicts well-financed patentees backed by reputable lenders will get the upper hand.
Do defendants and the court have the right to ask who is funding a particular patentlitigation? The party must identify the third-party funder and whether the third-party funder has the right to approve litigation or settlement decisions. The issue arose as a result of two standing orders issued by Judge Connolly.
Actavis decision has guided pharmaceutical litigators and advisors exploring the antitrust risks inherent in settling pharmaceutical patent lawsuits, especially when such settlements could be viewed to include large and unjustified payments to an alleged infringing ANDA filer (or biosimilar manufacturer).
Stroud is General Counsel at Unified Patents – an organization often adverse to litigation-funded entities. [1] Patent assertion finance today is a multibillion-dollar business. [2] 2] Virtually nonexistent in the patent space in the U.S. Patent assertion finance today is a multibillion-dollar business. [2]
The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) sued AbbVie and Besins Healthcare, co-owners of a patent that covered brand AndroGel, in 2017. The FTC claimed that the manufacturers had brought “sham” patent infringement litigation in 2011 against Teva and another generic supplier, Perrigo. Actavis, in violation of Section 5.
Actavis that reverse payment settlements—or settlements where a patent holder pays an accused patent infringer cash or other consideration to end the patentlitigation—may be subject to antitrust scrutiny if they are "large and unjustified," lower courts have been in search of an administrable pleading standard for these claims.
In March, Samsung agreed to pay UK Nanotechnology Company Nanoco USD 150 million in a patent infringement dispute over patents used in QLED televisions that featured legal team from Wei Chixue Law Firm of Linda Liu Group - a Top 10 IP Law Firm in China. By: Linda Liu & Partners
A British nanotechnology company said Friday it landed $150 million from its litigation-funded patent infringement lawsuits against Samsung that ended in a settlement last month, just as jury selection was set to kick off in one of the cases in Marshall, Texas.
A banner week saw the district court roaring back to life with 93 new patent filings and over 50 closed cases, including all of the remanded Section 101 rulings in Realtime Data, LLC. The order is still sealed, but as it closes the cases again, one must assume it provides additional reasoning and again cancels Realtime’s patents under 101.
An average week saw 54 district court patent filings and 30 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) petitions, the majority of the latter being associated with semiconductor litigation.
Kewalramani), the Central District of California denied Defendant Netflix’s attempts to compel Plaintiff GoTV Streaming to provide documents and further information as to the source of the litigation funding that GoTV received in conjunction with the patentlitigation.
OpenSky’s behavior in this proceeding is entirely distinguishable from conventional settlement negotiations that take place in an adversarial proceeding. I also find that OpenSky engaged in abuse of process and unethical conduct by offering to undermine and/or not vigorously pursue this matter in exchange for a monetary payment.
district court data on how patent damages expert testimony has been challenged based on comparability, and how courts have ruled with regard to license and settlement agreements, litigation verdicts, market studies and more. Rich Franciosa and Michael Herrigel at Charles River Associates analyze nearly seven years of U.S.
How to Ask the Right Questions About Utility Patent Infringement Utility patent infringement is complex, to say the least. It’s not just about whether the products infringe the utility patent. Need to enforce or defend a utility patent infringement claim? What is utility patent infringement?
patent system. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on “Discretionary Institution Practices, Petition Word-Count Limits, and Settlement Practices for America Invents Act Trial Proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board [PTAB]” was Tuesday, June 20.
Patent 8,129,385 (“patent 385”). This article delves into the legal doctrines that support the parties’ claims and the overarching strategy to their settlement. ViiV alleges Gilead infringed upon patent 385 under the doctrine of equivalents, which has two exclusions: dedication-disclosure and specific exclusion.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit agreed with a district court earlier this week that neither a settlement agreement between AbbVie and a number of generic biologics companies, nor the 132 patents owned by Abbvie covering its blockbuster drug, Humira, violate the Sherman Antitrust Act.
as part of a settlement of the companies' patent and contract litigation over Wi-Fi routers in the U.S. Netgear Inc. has received $135 million from TP-Link Systems Inc. International Trade Commission and California federal courts.
On August 13, 2021, in a decision that largely flew under antitrust and patent practitioners’ radars, U.S. Koh mostly denied a motion to dismiss in the alleged “reverse payment” case, In Re Xyrem (Sodium Oxybate) Antitrust Litig.1 District Judge Lucy H.
The fantastical and mind-blowing virtual worlds of Ready Player One and Sword Art Online may soon be within reach as the patent race for virtual reality technology heats up between major companies like Disney , Microsoft , and Sony. Companies are racing to patent the most comfortable options for VR hardware. .
The Federal Circuit has provided additional guidance about an appellant’s standing to appeal IPR decisions after settling the related litigations and entering into patent license agreements. The saga began with Qualcomm accusing Apple of infringing several patents in district court. patents 7,844,037 and 8,683,362.
Following years of infringement litigation over its patented wireless chip technologies, the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has recently enjoyed a pair of settlement outcomes pointing to the strength of the research university’s patent holdings.
Template from Nokia’s timeless “hands” commercial (see here ) In a major development, all the patent disputes (including the 5G SEP dispute) between Oppo and Nokia stand settled as both parties enter into a cross-licensing agreement.
A preliminary injunction has been issued against the state’s strict reverse payment law, but antitrust considerations are here to stay in IP litigationsettlements.
This week saw 60 district court patent complaints, 76 terminations, 26 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) petitions (some post grant reviews [PGRs] in there), and two new Fintiv denials—one PGR and one inter partes review (IPR).
Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) rule that would mandate the disclosure of all settlement agreements made between parties appearing before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). Introduction - On June 18, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) unanimously agreed to submit a comment supporting a recent proposed U.S.
It was another slow week for patent filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and a typical week in district courts, with 52 district court complaints filed and 22 new PTAB petitions. There was a new discretionary denial, a bunch of litigation-provoked high-profile PTAB challenges, and some notable new litigations.
patents approaching four million you would think patent suits are also up. Litigation is more infrequent than Continue reading With the number of active U.S. Think again.
In a recent decision out of the Southern District of Texas, Judge Lee Rosenthal found the patent infringement case brought by VDPP against Volkswagen to qualify for sanctions under the Patent Act 35 U.S.C. § VDPP Sanctions Memo VDPP Dismissal Memo VDPP’s US Patent No. The court also relied upon 28 U.S.C. Ramey (Ramey LLP).
The USPTO is seeking comments on “the state of patent eligibility jurisprudence” and how eligibility law impacts both innovation and investment-in-innovation. and (2) Is patent eligibility a question of law for the court or a question of fact for the jury? The deadline for submissions is October 15, 2021. Berkheimer, No.
Patentlitigators who represent plaintiffs and defendants agree the new standing order favours the defence, but one litigation financier predicts well-financed patentees backed by reputable lenders will get the upper hand.
On January 6, 2023, Genentech and Tanvex reached a settlement in principle to resolve all claims with respect to Genentech’s BCPIA complaint. Tanvex responded in September 2022, denying infringement of the three patents and asserting counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity.
What makes the cost of patentlitigation so high? What would you think if I told you that the average patentlitigation cost exceeds well over $1 million ? To put it another way, how would you feel knowing that one million dollars might not get you halfway through a patent lawsuit?
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content