• Horizon Med. LLC v. Apotex Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-12-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Karen E. Keller, Andrew E. Russell, Nathan R. Hoeschen, Emily S. DiBenedetto, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sanya Sukduang, Johnathan R. Davis, Allison E. Elkman, Cooley LLP, Washington, DC; Mazda Antia, Erin Trenda, Cooley LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Kenneth L. Dorsney, Cortlan S. Hitch, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Deepro R. Mukerjee, Lance A. Soderstrom, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, New York, NY; Joseph M. Janusz, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Charlotte, NC for defendants.

    Case Number: 22-640-CJB

    A patent licensor could issue a license to a future continuation patent that was ultimately not issued to the licensor by expressly including future continuation patents in the scope of the license since permitting the eventual patent owner to sue for infringement of the continuation patent would undermine rights acquired for consideration by the licensee.

  • Bd. of Regents, Univ. of Texas Sys. v. Boston Scientific Corp.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-29
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Education | Health Care
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Williams
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stamatios Stamoulis, Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, DE; Michael W. Shore, Alfonso G. Chan, Chijioke E. Offor, Shore Chan DePumpo LLP, Dallas, TX; Brian D. Melton, John P. Lahad, Corey M. Lipschutz, Susman Godfrey LLP, Houston, TX for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Chad Drown, Timothy E. Grimsrud, Katherine S., Razavi, Lauren J.F. Barta, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Minneapolis, MN; David J.F. Gross, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, East Palo Alto, CA; Christopher J. Burrell, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP Washington, D.C.; Melissa A. Anyetei, James R. Ferguson, Michael J. Word, Ma yer Brown LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.

    Case Number: 18-392-GBW

    The court issued a decision granting official definitions to the term "fiber" in a claim construction request.

  • Barry v. Stryker Corp.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-29
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Clay Holloway, Mitchell G. Stockwell, Courtney S. Dabbiere, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Atlanta, GA; Dario A. Machleidt, Kathleen R. Geyer, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Seattle, WA; Taylor J. Pfingst, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Andrew W. Rinehart, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Winston-Salem, NC for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Brian P. Egan, Cameron P. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Chad T. Nitta, Jason S. Jackson, Heather N. Tilley, Kutak Rock, LLP, Denver, CO for defendants.

    Case Number: 20-1787-RGA

    The court denied defendants' request for leave to amend their complaint, finding that voluminous discovery was not an adequate basis for delay and defendants did not act with diligence in seeking leave to amend.

  • Allergan USA, Inc. v. Sun Pharm. Indus. Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-29
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jeremy A. Tigan, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Lisa B. Pensabene, Hassen A. Sayeed, Daniel O'Boyle, Carolyn S. Wall, James Y. Li, Mark A. Hayden, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Energio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Charles B. Klein, Jovial Wong, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, DC; Kevin J. Boyle, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.

    Case Number: 19-1727-RGA

    The court granted plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings in part and denied in part.

  • In re Entresto Patent Litig.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-29
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel M. Silver, Alexandra M. Joyce, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Nicholas N. Kallas, Christina Schwarz, Christopher E. Loh, Susanne L. Flanders, Jared L. Stringham, Shannon K. Clark, Laura K. Fishwick, Gregory J. Manas, Venable LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Scott A. Cunning II, Elizabeth M. Crompton, Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP, Washington, DC; C. Kyle Musgrove, Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP, Charlotte, NC for defendant.

    Case Number: 20-md-2930-RGA

    Court dismissed infringement claims and counterclaims of non-infringement after defendant converted its Paragraph IV certification to a 21 U.S.C. §355(j)(2)(A)(viii) statement averring the non-infringement of its ANDA product.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Georgia Construction Law Handbook 2024

    Authors: T. BART GARY, JAKE CARROLL

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Groove Digital, Inc. v. King.com Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-29
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Software | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Karen L. Pascale, Robert M. Vrana, Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brian S. Seal, Thomas G. Southard, Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Cameron P. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael J. Sacksteder Fenwick & West LLP, San Francisco, CA; Geoffrey Miller, Fenwick & West LLP, Mountain View, CA; Michael Flynn, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen R. Smith, Samuel Whitt, Cooler LLP, Washington, DC for defendants.

    Case Number: 18-836-RGA

    Court relied upon extrinsic evidence to understand how person of ordinary skill in the art would construe patent terms in dispute in claim construction.

  • Bearbox LLC v. Lancium LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-11-22
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Williams
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew C. Mayo, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Benjamin T. Horton, John R. Labbe, Raymond R. Ricordati III, Chelsea M. Murray, Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Chad S.C. Stover, Mark C. Nelson, Darrick J. Hooker, Adam M. Kaufmann, Dana Amato Sarros, David M. Lisch, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: 21-534-GBW

    The court issued a ruling defining the claim terms of a patent consistent with the arguments made by defendant LLC.

  • Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-08
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce | Entertainment and Leisure | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; James R. Hannah, Paul J. Andre, Lisa Kobialka, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Menlo Park, CA; Aaron M. Frankel, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Cameron P. Clark, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Aaron E. Hankel, B. Trent Webb, John Garretson, Jordan T. Bergsten, Maxwell C. McGraw, Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP, Kansas City, MO for defendant.

    Case Number: 16-453-RGA

    Doctrine of equivalents claim was collaterally estopped where plaintiff had unsuccessfully attempted in another suit to attempt to read out claim elements to prove that product function in both cases satisfied a claim limitation under the doctrine.

  • Eagle Pharm., Inc. v. Slayback Pharma LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-11-08
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel M. Silver, Alexandra M. Joyce, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel G. Brown, Rebecca Lynne Neubauer, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC; Kenneth G. Schuler, Marc N. Zubick, Alex Grabowski, Latham & Watkins LLP, Chicago, IL; Jennifer Koh, David F. Kowalski, Latham & Watkins LLP, San Diego, CA; Herman Yue, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Neal C. Belgam, Eve H. Ormerod, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Constance S. Huttner, Paul S. St. Marie, Jr., Roy H. Wepner, Beth C. Finkelstein, Jason A. Lief, Windels Marx Lane & Mittendorf LLP, Madison, NJ; Kenneth L. Dorsey, Cortlan S. Hitch, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Deepro R. Mukerjee, Lance A. Soderstrom, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, New York, NY; Jitendra Malik, Joseph M. Janusz, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Charlotte, NC; Christopher B. Ferenc, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Washington, DC; Rachel L. Schweers, Rachel J. Schaub, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.

    Case Number: 21-1256-CFC-JLH

    New drug application did not infringe on patent describing "ready to use" pharmaceutical product where proposed products were not prepackaged and required substantial effort to prepare the drug for administration.

  • Bial-Portela & CA. S.A. v. Alkem Lab. Ltd

    Publication Date: 2022-10-04
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Steven J. Balick, Andrew C. Mayo, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; James B. Monroe, Jennifer H. Roscetti, Charles T. Collins-Chase, Lauren J. Dowty, Meredith H. Boerschlein, Ryan V. McDonnell, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC; Jack B. Blumenfeld, Karen A. Jacobs, Jennifer Ying, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Benjamin J. Schladweiler, Samuel L. Moultrie, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Aaron F. Barkoff, Alejandro Menchaca, Rajendra A. Chiplunkar, Ben J. Mahon, Ashley M. Ratycz, McAndrews, Held & Malloy, LTD., Chicago, IL for defendant.

    Case Number: 18-304-CFC-CJB

    Court found for defendants in part in a case claiming patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271e(2)(A) for a new patent application for medication to treat partial-onset epileptic seizures.