SEABED GEOSOLUTIONS (US) INC. v. MAGSEIS FF LLC.

Before Moore, Linn, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Summary: Where a claim term’s meaning is clear from the intrinsic evidence, no extrinsic evidence of special meaning is considered.

GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. [OPINION] – PRECEDENTIAL

Before Moore, Newman, Prost (dissent). Panel rehearing of an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware

Summary: Substantial evidence supported the jury verdict of induced infringement when testimony indicated that a generic failed to carve out a potentially infringing use from a label and the generic’s advertisements provided further evidence of an intent to encourage the patented use.

According to the FDA, the medical device industry experienced significant supply chain disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Such disruptions caused shortages of PPE, ventilators, diagnostic testing, and other medical devices.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided a case resolving a patent dispute between two medical device companies, Hologic, Inc. and Minerva Surgical. The opinion was closely watched because it raised the question of whether an inventor who has assigned a patent is legally prevented from later attacking the validity of that same patent — a doctrine historically referred to as “assignor estoppel.”

Nephros, Inc. acquired GenArraytion, Inc., a manufacturer of infectious disease monitoring and measurement products. The acquisition is Nephros’s first medical products sector transaction.

Andra Group, LP (“Andra”) sued Victoria’s Secret Stores, L.L.C., Victoria’s Secret Stores Brand Management, Inc., Victoria’s Secret Direct Brand Management, LLC, and L Brands, Inc. (collectively, “Victoria’s Secret”) for patent infringement in the District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

Mondis Technology Ltd., Hitachi Maxell Ltd., and Maxell, Ltd. (collectively, “Mondis”) sued LG Electronics Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, “LG”) for infringement of a patent covering a video display configured to receive video signals from an external source.

A party should be given notice and an opportunity to respond before the PTAB sua sponte departs from an uncontested claim construction in a manner that omits an agreed-upon feature of the claim when the absence of that feature in prior art was a central dispute in the proceeding.

Daikin requested inter partes review of two of Chemours’ patents directed to insulating communication cables by pulling wires through melted polymers flowing at a flow rate.

BOT M8 LLC v. SONY CORPORATION OF AMERICA

Before Dyk, Linn, and O’Malley. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California

Summary: The district court’s conclusion that allegations of infringement were not plausible because they tracked the claim language too closely presented an overly burdensome pleading standard.