Category Archives: Inequitable Conduct/Rule 56

Millennium Pharm. v. Sandoz, Inc. – Revenge of the Chemical Judges

In the 2003 panel decision in Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm., Inc., the panel rejected “the contention that inherent anticipation requires recognition [of the claim element not found] in the prior art.” The claims were directed to a bioactive metabolite … Continue reading

Posted in Inequitable Conduct/Rule 56 | 1 Comment

Supreme Court Rewrites the Law of Enhanced Damages

This is a guest post by Janice M. Mueller of Chisum Patent Academy. Today the Supreme Court rewrote the law of enhanced damages for willful patent infringement by issuing a unanimous decision in No. 14-1513, Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, Inequitable Conduct/Rule 56, Infringement | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Merck’s Solvaldi® Patents Unenforceable for Egregious Misconduct

In Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Merck & Co., Inc., Case No. 13-cv-04057-BLE (N.D. Cal., June 6, 2016), Judge Beth Freeman, sitting in equity, found that the record compelled a finding that Merck and its employee “D” had obtained asserted patents … Continue reading

Posted in Inequitable Conduct/Rule 56 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Apotex Petitions Supreme Court to Review Therasense Standards

In Apotex, Inc. v. UCB, Inc., Appeal No. 2013-1674 (Fed. Cir. August 15, 2014) the court affirmed the district court’s ruling that one actor, Dr. Sherman, the chairman of Apotex had committed inequitable conduct by engaging in what the court … Continue reading

Posted in Inequitable Conduct/Rule 56 | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment