Patently O

MARCH 20, 2023

3d 1333, 1342 (Fed. Normally, collateral estoppel only applies to issues actually litigated, but in the patent context, the Federal Circuit has ruled that it may also apply to non-litigated claims when the differences do not “materially alter the question of invalidity.” ” Ohio Willow Wood Co. Alps South, LLC, 735 F.3d

Litigation 67

Litigation Litigating Court 67

Patently O

DECEMBER 7, 2023

4th 1320, 1333 (Fed. ” Overall, the court ruling places a hard stop against a potential form of evergreening that brand drug companies could have used to prevent generic entry through method-of-use patents obtained later in a drug’s lifecycle. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. , The statute’s patent specific.”

Manufacturing 125

Manufacturing Statute Court Construction 125

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 22, 2022

But many courts have construed the law broadly to confer sweeping immunity on some of the largest companies in the world.”. “And in the 24 years since,” Thomas wrote in Malwarebytes , the justices “have never interpreted this provision. The petition in Gonzalez v. Google LLC tries to present itself as the case Thomas has been looking for.

Court 83

Court Statute Laws Attorney 83

Patently O

DECEMBER 11, 2023

Assume also that the company selling the software doesn’t provide specific instructions on how to use the five features, thus taking potential liability outside the realm of § 271(b). 3d 1333, 1340 (Fed. Each of the five features is separately and distinctly patented using a method claim. See also Grunenthal GMBH v.

Technology 44

Technology Litigation Litigating Construction 44