Case Overview Shoals Technologies Group, LLC v. Voltage, LLC and Ningbo Voltage Smart Production Co., No. 1:25-cv-00026 (M.D.N.C. June 5, […]
The Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB decisions finding all challenged claims of three patents related to lost-computer recovery screens unpatentable as obvious, rejecting challenges to IPR institution and claim construction.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that Nexus Pharmaceuticals’ generic minocycline product infringes Melinta’s patent covering a magnesium-containing antibiotic formulation that reduces injection-site hemolysis.
NEC Corporation v. Anker Innovations Technology Co., Ltd. et al, No. 2:24-CV-00720-JRG (E.D. Tex. June 4, 2026) (Gilstrap, J.) Download […]
A unanimous Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit and ended Amarin’s induced infringement suit against Hikma’s skinny-label generic of Vascepa, holding that anodyne marketing references to the branded drug do not plausibly allege that a generic maker actively encouraged infringing u
The Federal Circuit vacated an $11.5 million patent infringement verdict against ecobee, holding that a single-question verdict form covering four patents was improper and that the jury was not properly instructed on the abstract idea under Alice step two.
The Federal Circuit reversed a PTAB decision that had upheld claims of a spinal implant patent, finding the Board misconstrued the term ‘complementary with one another’ and that the claims are obvious under the correct construction.
The UPC Court of Appeal ruled that the Unified Patent Court can accept jurisdiction over patent infringement in non-member states like the UK, but overturned a Mannheim injunction on substantive grounds — establishing a three-category framework for managing long-arm claims.
A Northern District of California court denied Google’s motion to dismiss a direct infringement claim over containerization technology patents, finding that whether Google Kubernetes Engine and Cloud Run satisfy the patent’s filtering requirement must await claim construction.
A Texas federal court construed ten disputed terms across five cybersecurity patents asserted by Arizona State University’s commercialization arm against CrowdStrike, largely adopting plain-and-ordinary-meaning constructions and rejecting CrowdStrike’s bids to narrow the claims.