1. Kappos v. Hyatt, No. 10-1219,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 132 S. Ct. 1690; 2012 U.S. LEXIS 3107; 23
Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 275, January 9, 2012, Argued, April 18, 2012,
Decided, The LEXIS pagination of this
document is subject to change pending release of the final published version. [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: 35
U.S.C.S. § 145 neither imposed unique evidentiary limits in district court
proceedings nor established a heightened standard of review for the PTO's
factual findings, thus, vacating a summary judgment granted to the PTO on the
basis of excluding a patent applicant's new evidence that had not been before
the PTO was proper.
CORE TERMS: patent,
new evidence, Federal Rules, de novo, standard of review, administrative
record, civil action, deferential, introduce, Patent Act ...
2. Caraco Pharm. Labs., Ltd. v.
Novo Nordisk A/S, No. 10-844, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 132 S. Ct.
1670; 2012 U.S. LEXIS 3106; 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 259, December 5, 2011,
Argued, April 17, 2012, Decided, The
LEXIS pagination of this document is subject to change pending release of the
final published version. [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Drug
manufacturers' competitor was entitled to seek correction of manufacturers' use
code for its method-of-use patent under 21 U.S.C.S. § 355 to permit approval of
competitor's proposed generic drug which claimed other uses, since
manufacturers' claim of one use did not preclude challenge and use code was
patent information subject to correction.
CORE TERMS: patent,
brand, counterclaim, generic, manufacturer, generic drug, approve, label,
repaglinide, listing
3. FTC v. Watson Pharms., Inc.,
No. 10-12729, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, 2012
U.S. App. LEXIS 8377, April 25, 2012, Decided, April 25, 2012, Filed [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Absent
sham litigation or fraud in obtaining the patent, a drug company's reverse
payment patent infringement settlement with generic drug manufacturers was
immune from an antitrust attack pursuant to 15 U.S.C.S. § 45(a)(1) so long as
its anticompetitive effects fell within the scope of the exclusionary potential
of the patent.
CORE TERMS: patent,
settlement, generic, antitrust, holder, monopoly, manufacturer, exclusionary,
infringement, invalid ...
4. Landmark Screens, LLC v.
Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius, LLP, 2011-1297, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8167, April 23, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Applicant's
claim against former counsel for fraud in improperly processing a patent
application was timely filed in federal court after dismissal of a state-court
action based on federal patent jurisdiction, since equitable tolling applied
based on notice of the claim to counsel, lack of prejudice to counsel, and the
applicant's good faith.
CORE TERMS: divisional,
patent, reissue, fraud claim, malpractice, equitable tolling, statute of
limitations, invention, patent law, notice ...
5. USPPS, Ltd. v. Avery Dennison
Corp., 2011-1525, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012
U.S. App. LEXIS 7728, April 17, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: District
court correctly determined that a patent applicant's complaint alleging fraud
and breach of fiduciary duty was untimely under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code
Ann. § 16.004(a) because the injury occurred no later than the date of final
notices on the patent applications and there was no basis for tolling of the
limitations period.
CORE TERMS: patent,
malpractice, patent law, case law, fiduciary duty, quotation marks omitted, law
claims, jurisdictional, personalized, invention ...
6. Dey Pharma, LP v. Sunovion
Pharms., Inc., 2011-1507, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7568, April 16, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Where
there was subject matter jurisdiction when a new drug application filer
commenced a declaratory judgment action, the case could proceed until rendered
moot when the drug actually went on the market in a way that would trigger its
180 day exclusivity period, under 35 U.S.C.S. § 271(e)(5) and 21 U.S.C.S. §
355(j)(5)(C).
CORE TERMS: patent,
declaratory judgment, filer, exclusivity, generic, infringement, trigger,
launch, noninfringement, certification ...
7. Bayer Schering Pharma AG &
Bayer HealthCare Pharms., Inc. v. Lupin, Ltd., 2011-1143, 2011-1228, UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7570,
April 16, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Case
law made clear alleged infringers did not infringe patent under 35 U.S.C.S. §
271(e)(2)(A), and that their sale of generic form of drug would not induce
infringement. Their Abbreviated New Drug Applications sought approval to market
the generic form solely for contraceptive use, and there was no valid patent on
its use for that purpose alone.
CORE TERMS: label,
patent, infringement, patient, anti-androgenic, anti-mineralocorticoid,
generic, safe, clinical, labeling ...
8. Eurand, Inc. v. Mylan Pharms.,
Inc. (In re Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsule Patent
Litig.), 2011-1399, 2011-1409, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7571, April 16, 2012, Decided, Motion denied by
Eurand, Inc. v. Impax Labs., Inc. (In re Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride
Extended-Release Capsule Patent Litig.), 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8841 (Fed. Cir.,
Apr. 30, 2012) [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: District
court erred when it declared patents involving a modified-release dosage form
of skeletal muscle relaxants invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C.S. § 103(a)
because the district court placed undue weight on bioequivalence and, as a
result, misinterpreted the proffered prior art references.
CORE TERMS: obviousness,
patent, profile, skilled, invention, prior art, extended-release, artisan,
cyclobenzaprine, therapeutically ...
9. Aventis Pharma S.A. v.
Hospira, Inc., 2011-1018, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7095, April 9, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Patents
were pharmaceutical patents related to administration of a chemotherapy cancer
drug. Claim construction was reviewed de novo. District court's judgment that
claim 5 of '561 patent and claim 7 of '512 patent were invalid for obviousness
under 35 U.S.C.S. § 103, and that the patents were unenforceable for
inequitable conduct, was affirmed.
CORE TERMS: perfusion,
inequitable conduct, prior art, specification, composition, ethanol,
materiality, stability, patent, intent to deceive ...
10. Advanced Fiber Techs. Trust
v. J&L Fiber Servs., 2011-1243, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6641, April 3, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Patented
technology in appeal involved screening devices used in the pulp and paper
industry. District court's error in its interpretation of the term
"perforated" was in its reliance on extrinsic evidence that
contradicted patent's specification, including claims and written description.
Grant of summary judgment of noninfringement was reversed.
CORE TERMS: screening,
plate, medium, perforated, opening, screen, slot, summary judgment, pulp,
specification ...
....
Lexis.com subscribers can explore/search Patent Law resources on Lexis.com or access any of these Mathew Bender Patent Law publications:
Non-subscribers can purchase Patent Law
treatises/resources and Mathew Bender publications from the LexisNexis Bookstore
For more information about LexisNexis products and
solutions connect with us through our corporate
site.