- Justices Told To Skip Challenge Over Doctrine Of Equivalents – Eli Lilly and Co. is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reject a challenge of a Federal Circuit ruling over when patent infringement can be found under the doctrine of equivalents.
- The Federal Circuit Clarifies The Notice Requirements Of The Administrative Procedure Act – How do the notice requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act operate in the context of claim amendments during inter partes reviews?
- Uniloc’s Bluetooth Patent Case Against LG Revived – LG Electronics must face revived claims that it infringed a Bluetooth connectivity patent.
Here’s the latest.
Justices Urged to Skip Challenge Over Doctrine of Equivalents
Reported by Tiffany Hu on law360.com
In a recently filed brief, Eli Lilly asked the Supreme Court to reject a challenge of a Federal Circuit ruling over when patent infringement can be found under the doctrine of equivalents. Eli Lilly argued that the supposed conflicts with high court precedent “are of the petitioners’ own making.” The dispute with Hospira and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories involves a patent on the drug Alimta. Almita is used to treat mesothelioma and lung cancer.
For more on this case, see our coverage.
The Federal Circuit Clarifies the Notice Requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act
Reported by William Milliken on jdsupra.com
How do the notice requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act operate in the context of claim amendments during inter partes reviews? The Federal Circuit answered that question in Nike, Inc. v. Adidas AG, No. There it held that even though “the Board may sua sponte identify a patentability issue for a proposed substitute claim based on the prior art of record,” it “must provide notice of the issue and an opportunity for the parties to respond before issuing a final decision under 35 U.S.C. § 318(a).”
William Milliken reports that
“the panel’s holding appears to apply to any new argument that the Board might rely on in determining the patentability of proposed amended or substitute claims.”
For more on this case, see our coverage.
Uniloc’s Bluetooth Patent Case Against LG Revived
Reported by Blake Brittain on bloomberglaw.com
On Thursday, in Uniloc USA Inc. v. LG Elecs. USA Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a lower court decision that invalidated parts of Uniloc’s patent on Bluetooth technology. The Federal Circuit said that a California federal court erred when it found parts of Uniloc USA Inc.’s patent were directed to an abstract idea. The patent at issue enabled bluetooth device communication “without the need for a permanently active communication link.” The Federal Circuit found that the claims at issue were not abstract because it improved the functionality of the system.
For more on this case, see our coverage.