Intellectual Property Rights - News Letter Issue No:2020--087
September 2020 Issue
1. Teva Inks Patent Deal With Collegium Over Painkiller
Teva Pharmaceutical USA Inc. has inked a deal to resolve a patent case from Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc. over Teva's attempt to get a generic alternative to Collegium's Xtampza ER painkiller approved. More
2. Meril infringes Edwards’ heart valve patent, says English court
The English High Court has handed a partial victory to medical device company Edwards Lifesciences, after finding that rival Meril Life Sciences had infringed a patent covering a heart valve delivery system. However, the decision also provides freedom to operate for Meril on its competing heart valve product and delivery system. the Patents Court found that one of the patents in issue was infringed but invalid for obviousness. Although claim 1 of the second patent was held to be invalid, other claims were valid and infringed. More
3. Biogen MA, Inc. v. EMD Serono, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)
Novelty is perhaps the principal, most fundamental requirement for patentability, and depriving the public of anything in the prior art must be avoided. The Federal Circuit recently reinforced the primacy of these rubrics in Biogen MA, Inc. v. EMD Serono, Inc. More
4. Appeals Court Affirms Validity Of Enbrel® (etanercept) Patents Injunction Against Sandoz's Infringement Stands
Amgen today announced that the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held in Amgen's favor on the validity of two patents that describe and claim Enbrel® (etaner- cept) and methods for making it.Specifically, the appellate court affirmed an August 9, 2019 de- cision by the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey that had upheld the va- lidity of two patents asserted against Sandoz Inc., Sandoz International GmbH and Sandoz GmbH (together, Sandoz) based on Sandoz's biosimilar of Enbrel® (etanercept). The patent in- fringement action was brought against Sandoz by Amgen affiliates Immunex Corporation and Amgen Manufacturing, Limited, along with the owner and licensor of the two patents, Hoff- mann-La Roche Inc. Before trial, Sandoz acknowledged its biosimilar etanercept infringes seven claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,063,182 and 8,163,522 (the '182 and '522 patents).More
5. Sonos sues Google for infringing five more wireless audio patents
Sonos has filed another patent lawsuit against Google, alleging that the search giant is infring- ing five wireless audio patents across the entire line of Nest and Chromecast products. The move comes on the eve of Google‘s fall hardware event on September 30th, where it is ex- pected to announce a new Chromecast and Nest smart speaker alongside new Pixel phones. Sonos filed its first patent lawsuits against Google in January in California federal court and with the International Trade Commission; the federal case has been put on hold while the ITC reaches a decision on whether to block Google‘s allegedly infringing products from market. Thenew case is filed only in the federal court for the Western District of Texas — an emerging pa- tent lawsuit hotspot — and represents a more aggressive approach from Sonos.More
6. PureShield Says Allied Bio Coronavirus Disinfectant Infringes
Chemical company PureShield Inc. claimed in a lawsuit filed Monday in Texas federal court that Allied BioScience Inc.'s SurfaceWise 2 surface disinfectant, which advertises protection against COVID-19 for up to seven days, infringes on 10 of PureShield's patents.PureShield claims Allied BioScience's SurfaceWise 2, which is being used by American Airlines Inc. and a Texas orthopedics business, was created when Allied BioScience copied PureShield's chemi- cal formulas and put them in its own products. The lawsuit also says Allied BioScience's Sur- faceWise and Germmax products infringe its patents.More
7. Biogen loses appeal in patent dispute over multiple sclerosis drug
Biogen comes up empty in its appeal of a lower court ruling invalidating a key patent covering beta-interferon, its multiple sclerosis med branded as Avonex (interferon beta-1a).It was seek- ing billions in royalties from Merck KGaA (OTCPK:MKGAY) related to its MS med Rebif (inter- feron beta-1a).The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ordered that the jury verdict in- validating the patent be reinstated. The trial judge in New Jersey has set aside the verdict and granted a new trial.
8. Tormasi v. Western Digital Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2020)
Federal Circuit affirmed an Order by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Califor- nia, finding that Appellant Walter A. Tormasi lacked the capacity to sue under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(b). Mr. Tormasi had filed suit against Appellee Western Digital Corp., as- serting that Western Digital had infringed claims 41 and 61-63 of U.S. Patent No. 7,324,301. More
9. Philips Sues Dell, HP, Intel Over Copy-Protection Patents
Koninklijke Philips NV sued computer companies including Dell Technologies Inc., Lenovo Group Ltd., HP Inc., and Intel Corp. in Delaware federal court on Thursday for allegedly infring- ing up to four patents with their ―digital-video capable devices‖ including computers, monitors, servers, and other products that support the HDCP 2.0 protocol.Philips also named LG Elec- tronics Inc., Realtek Semiconductor Corp., and MediaTek Inc. in the complaints.U.S. Patent Nos. 9,436,809; 10,091,186; 9,590,977; and 10,298,564—all titled ―Secure Authenticated Dis- tance Measurement"—broadly cover technology used in the High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection copy-protection standard. The patents specifically cover technology related to a ―lo- cality check‖ used to authenticate streaming content. More
10. Gilead Sciences Accused of Paying to Keep Competition Off the Market
A new HIV medication class action lawsuit claims Gilead Sciences paid the generic drug- manufacturer Cipla to keep its competing HIV treatment off the market, creating an illegal mo- nopoly for its own Truvada medication that deprived customers of lower cost options.The anti- trust case was brought Sept. 17 by the Jacksonville Police Officers and Fire Fighters Health In- surance Trust in Jacksonville, Florida in U.S. District Court for the Northern District California, San Francisco Division. Both Gilead and Cipla are named as defendants. In exchange for thelicensing deal, Cipla would refrain from selling a generic version of Gilead‘s Truvada with the same active ingredients, the class action lawsuit claims. More
11. Biogen Faces ‘Worst-Case’ Scenario in Tecfidera Patent Loss (2)
Biogen Inc.‘s lone surviving patent on multiple-sclerosis drug Tecfidera, which accounted for nearly a third of the company‘s revenue last year, was invalidated by a federal judge who said the issue was already decided by another court in June.U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika in Wilmington, Delaware, said Wednesday Biogen could not re-litigate in her court a June 18 ruling by a federal court in West Virginia that found the Tecfidera patent, which ex- pires in February 2028, should never have been issued. An appeals court in Washington has agreed to hear the West Virginia case on an expedited basis...
12. Snyders Heart Valve LLC v. St. Jude Medical, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2020)
Federal Circuit vacated the final written decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review involving Appellant Snyders Heart Valve LLC and Appellee St. Jude Medical, LLC, and remanded for proceedings consistent with the Court's decision in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019). Snyders argued that the final written decision at issue on appeal violated the Consti- tution's Appointments Clause because it was rendered by an unconstitutionally appointed panel of Administrative Patent Judges. Snyders also argued that the remedy in Arthrex is insufficient because it does not allow for review of the Board's decisions by a superior officer and is inconsistent with Congress' intent that Administrative Patent Judges act independent- ly. Snyders further argued that due to the unique circumstances of its case, it was entitled to greater relief than afforded under Arthrex.More
13. : PATENT-PENDING LOW SULPHUR FUEL TECHNOLOGY WAS COPIED, CLAIM IN VENTORS
Marico Ltd., one of Rigby Refining executives are seeking a jury trial to determine if Phillips 66 and WRB Refining ‗copied‘ their Magēmā low sulphur fuel technology.A complaint has been filed in a Texas district court over the alleged use of the Magēmā technology which was developed by Rigby Refining CEO Michael Moor and Chief Technologist Bertrand Klussman.Their solution is to hydroprocess an ISO 8217:2017 heavy marine fuel to remove sulphur while preserving the fuel‘s key properties. The resulting product is said to be com- pliant with the ISO 8217:2017 standard, the IMO 2020 sulphur cap and the IMO‘s emission control area (ECA) sulphur limits. More
14. Facebook, Inc. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC
Windy City sued Facebook for patent infringement, and Facebook then filed IPR petitions di- rected to certain claims in the asserted patents. Later, after the one-year time bar of 35 U.S.C.
- 315(b) had passed, Windy City identified the claims it was asserting in the district court litiga- tion, prompting Facebook to file additional IPR petitions along with motions for joinder to the earlier IPRs that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board had instituted. The Board granted the mo- tions and ultimately found certain of the challenged claims unpatentable as obvious, including claims challenged only in the later-joined proceedings. Facebook appealed, and Windy City cross-appealed. More
15. Divisibility of the grounds of invalidity & the need for reasoned statement
The General Court decision in Case T‑100/19 – among other points of law – focussed on these two questions, answering the first question in the negative. Thereby, the General Court explicit- ly stated that the scope of the invalidity action would be determined by the arguments, facts and evidence adduced by the parties.With regard to the second question, the General Court used the opportunity to confirm previous rulings, but agreed with the applicant that in the cir- cumstances of the present case, the Board of Appeal erroneously failed to provide reasoning as to why Art. 4(2)(b) CDR applies. More
16. K. Narayanan and Ors. v. S. Murali
Appellants were engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling banana chips and had adopted the trademark ‗A-ONE‘ in 1986. Appellants had applied for trade mark registration be- fore the Trade Mark Registry at Chennai in 1999. The said application was pending at the time of the present Civil Appeal. While, the application of the Appellants was still pending, Respond- ent brought a suit in the year 2000 in Coimbatore seeking an injunction restraining the Appel- lants from passing off their goods under the said trademark. This suit was dismissed by the Learned District Judge in the year 2001.More
17. Design patent: Bharat Glass Tube Limited v. Gopal Glass Works Limited
Respondent, had registered their designs for diamond shaped glass sheets under the Designs Act, 2000. The Respondent therefore acquired the sole right to manufacture and market the glass sheets in the design that was registered in its name. The designs that were formed on the glass sheets were formed by engraved rollers which were developed by Dornbusch Gra- vuren GMBH, (Hereinafter ‗German Company‘), which had licensed all Indian rights to the re- spondent.Appellant, along with its associate IAG Co. Ltd. started imitating the said registered designs. As a result, Respondent was constrained to file a suit against the Appellant and IAG Co. Ltd. in the District Court of Mehsana, Gujarat. Respondent also obtained a restraint order in the said suitMore
18. M/S Arudra Engineers Private Limited v. M/S Patanjali Ayurveda Limited & Anr.; Order dispos- ing Interim Application
Plaintiff came to know of the Defendants’ use of the mark through reports which came about in the press and electronic media about launching of a product to cure the coronavirus. However, the conflicting re- ports with respect to the nature of the product being sold by the Defendants would indicate that such in- fringement would cause serious harm to the reputation of the Plaintiff. More
19.HCL's US arm faces patent infringement claim related to one of its software products
HCL America, the US subsidiary of software exporter HCL Technologies NSE 0.17 %, is facing a patent infringement claim related to one of its software products.HCL America is due to respond to the lawsuit filed by a Texas-based company, Coretek Licensing, by 28 September, as per court documents reviewed by ET.Coretek Licensing, a legal arm of technology services company Coretek Services, filed the case in the southern district court of New York in late June, 020. More