Declarations from generic drug makers alleged only possible future injury from implementation of the 2019 law that created a presumption that so-called “pay for delay” settlement agreements are anticompetitive. A trade association for the generic pharmaceutical industry failed to demonstrate standing to challenge a California law that created a presumption that “reverse payment” settlement agreements…

The PTAB did not err in finding that airplane interior designers would have been motivated to combine prior art to arrive at the space-saving configuration disclosed by the challenged patents. Challenged claims of patents related to space-saving technologies for aircraft lavatories and other aircraft enclosures were correctly determined by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board…

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.—which had successfully petitioned for IPR—withdrew from the case after Huawei filed its appeal, but the U.S. government intervened to defend the PTAB’s decision. Substantial evidence supported the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s findings that a relevant artisan would have found obvious the claims of a patent directed to enabling a mobile…

In the United States, a judge may increase the damages for patent infringement up to threefold[1] resulting in awards of millions, or even billons, of dollars.  In 2016, the Supreme Court, in Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics,[2] rejected the then prevailing objective standard for determining enhanced damages and replaced it with a subjective one requiring,…

Holding bench trial instead of jury trial deprived SEP owner Ericsson of Seventh Amendment rights because trial was held to determine compensatory relief for mobile device maker TCL’s past infringement. Swedish telecommunications company Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson and its U.S. subsidiary Ericsson Inc. (together, “Ericsson”) should have been given a jury trial instead of a bench…

Three PTAB decisions were decided by APJs invalidly appointed, but two Circuit Judges would find the defect wholly cured by Federal Circuit’s recent Arthrex decision. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has vacated three Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions following inter partes review of three patents on the ground that patent…

A jury’s verdict that snowmobile frame patents asserted against Arctic Cat were indefinite and invalid as anticipated or obvious was supported by substantial evidence. A federal district court correctly upheld a jury verdict invalidating two Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. snowmobile frame patents because substantial evidence supported the jury’s findings that Bombardier’s patent related to rider…

The Board properly found that a person skilled in the art would not be motivated to combine two prior art references and that industry praise supported a finding of nonbviousness. Substantial evidence supported the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination following inter partes review that a patent owned by Frymaster LLC for measuring cooking oil…

The PTAB improperly found that the patent is unpatentable in view of the prior art. Concluding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board improperly construed certain claims in a patent for memory system circuits owned by Innovative Memory Systems, Inc. in an inter partes review filed by Micron Technology, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals…