The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today denied HZNP Medicines LLC’s (Horizon’s) request for rehearing in HZNP Medicines LLC v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., with Judges Newman, O’Malley, Stoll and Lourie dissenting. Judge Lourie, writing for the dissent, said that the Court “has erroneously misconstrued the ‘consisting essentially of’ language in evaluating the definiteness requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112” and that rehearing en banc should have been granted. In October, the CAFC affirmed the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey’s findings of invalidity and noninfringement of certain claims of some of the asserted Horizon patents, as well as the district court’s finding of nonobviousness of one claim of another Horizon patent. Judge Newman dissented in that decision, saying that “The majority’s new ruling sows conflict and confusion” and that it could “cast countless patents into uncertainty.”
Litigation
- How Patent Owners Should Be Rethinking Venue Selection and Case Strategy in a World Without Waco
- Amicus Brief Backing Inventor’s Eligibility Petition to SCOTUS Says 101 Exceptions Constitute ‘Judicial Legislation’
- Miami Beware: Patent Clouds Are Quickly Approaching the Sunshine State
- CAFC Affirms Water Heater Infringement Ruling Based on District Court Claim Construction
- CAFC Upholds PTAB’s Finding that Samsung Failed to Prove Magnetic Stripe Emulator Claims Obvious
Recent Posts
- The Copyright Claims Board: A Venue for Pursuing Actual or Statutory Damages Impacting Both Registered and Unregistered Works
- IP Goes Pop! – Intellectual Property and a ‘Wacky’ Professor – Brands and Inventions in the Springfield Universe, Part II
- How Patent Owners Should Be Rethinking Venue Selection and Case Strategy in a World Without Waco
- Amicus Brief Backing Inventor’s Eligibility Petition to SCOTUS Says 101 Exceptions Constitute ‘Judicial Legislation’
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, August 12: Canada to Add Resale Royalties to Copyright Law, Fifth Circuit Affirms Exclusion of Evidence in ‘Call of Duty’ Copyright Suit, and Ninth Circuit Rejects Trademark Appeal in Yoga Pants Case