Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post indicating the Second Circuit signaled agreement with Eighth and Third Circuits with regard to the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction;
- an article about “[t]he Federal Circuit rescu[ing] two patents that a lower court canceled in an inventor’s infringement lawsuit against Google LLC”; and
- another article about the Supreme Court “lift[ing] a stay blocking Gilenya generics from launching in the U.S.”
Dennis Crouch authored a blog post for PatentlyO indicating the Second Circuit signaled agreement with Eighth and Third Circuits with regard to the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction over appeals concerning motions to compel arbitration in patent infringement cases. Crouch expressed his view that confusion over the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction can be attributed in part to the fact “that the Federal Circuit’s jurisdictional statute is quite specific,” with four enumerated situations involving “patent cases before district courts.”
Kelcee Griffis wrote an article for Bloomberg Law about “[t]he Federal Circuit rescu[ing] two patents that a lower court canceled in an inventor’s infringement lawsuit against Google LLC.” Griffis explained how the patents, which are “related to geographically targeted search results,” were deemed by the Federal Circuit to be patent eligible following a New York federal court’s dismissal of “the case based on findings that the patents cover ineligible subject matter.”
Fraiser Kansteiner published an article for Fierce Pharma about the Supreme Court “lift[ing] a stay blocking Gilenya generics from launching in the U.S.” Kansteiner explained how this “has cleared the way for copies of the nearly $3 billion multiple sclerosis blockbuster to hit the market in the short term.” Kansteiner reported that while other suits brought by Novartis (the manufacturer of Gilenya) against generic drug makers have been settled, in this case “HEC Pharm wasn’t content to settle.”