Patent Claiming Antidote for Acetaminophen Overdoses Not Invalid as Either Derived From Another or Obvious Over the Prior Art

CUMBERLAND PHARMS. INC. v. MYLAN INSTITUTIONAL LLC:  Jan. 26, 2017.   Before Moore, Reyna, and Taranto. Takeaway: To prove that a claimed invention was derived from another, a defendant must show that the specific invention was previously conceived by someone else and then communicated to the named inventor. There is no …

District Court Correctly Analyzed Likelihood of Success and Irreparable Harm Elements When Granting Preliminary Injunction

TINNUS ENTERPRISES, LLC V. TELLEBRANDS CORP.: Jan. 24, 2017.  Before Moore, Wallach, and Stoll. Takeaway: Instruction manuals that teach a claim element can be used as circumstantial evidence of a customer’s direct infringement. Claim terms are not indefinite when the claims themselves provide parameters for determining whether the disputed limitation …

Graphical User Interface Improvements Without Pre-Electronic Analog Found Patent Eligible

TRADING TECHS. INT’L, INC. v. CQG, INC.: Jan. 18, 2017. Before Newman, O’Malley, Wallach. Takeaway: A new application or computer-implemented function is patent eligible when it is not simply the use of a computer to conduct a known process, but rather improves the whole system’s capability. Procedural Posture: Judge Coleman …

Federal Circuit Affirms Induced Infringement and No Validity of the Asserted Patent, the Inducement Being Determined in Accordance with an Interim En Banc Decision by the Court

    ELI LILLY AND CO. v. TEVA PARENTERAL MEDICINES, INC., No. 2015-2067 (Fed. Cir. January 12, 2017) (precedential).  On appeal from S.D. Ind. Before Prost, Newman, and Dyk. Procedural Posture: Plaintiff Eli Lily filed a Hatch-Waxman lawsuit against a group of generic pharmaceutical companies, including Teva, to prevent Defendants from …

Federal Circuit Determines That the PTAB Erred in Sustaining an Examiner’s Rejection of a Claim for Being Anticipated by Prior Art

IN RE: STEVEN C. CHUDIK, 2016-1487 (Fed. Cir. January 9, 2017) (non-precedential). On appeal from PTAB.  Before Prost, Clevenger, and Reyna. Procedural Posture: A patent claim was rejected as anticipated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) . Finding that the applicant failed to rebut the examiner’s …