Legal News

Case Summaries

Intellectual Property

[09/04] Janssen Pharmaceutica, N.V. v. Apotex, Inc.
In an action arising from alleged infringement of plaintiff's patent for the drug Risperdal, dismissal of defendant's counterclaims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is affirmed where no actual and continuing injuries to defendant existed regarding: 1) its ability to promptly launch its generic risperidone product and compete in the market immediately upon the expiration of plaintiff's patent; 2) delay of approval of its noninfringing generic risperidone product; and 3) patent uncertainty resulting from the coverage of a covenant-not-to-sue.

[09/04] In re Swanson
In a case regarding the reexamination of a patent for a method of quantitatively analyzing small amounts of biological fluids, a Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences decision affirming the examiner's rejection of certain claims is affirmed where: 1) a request for an ex parte reexamination of an issued patent upon a "substantial new question of patentability" was not barred by a prior court decision upholding the validity of a claim; and 2) substantial evidence supported the board's conclusion that there was a substantial new question of patentability in this case sufficient to warrant reexamination.

[09/04] Empresa Cubana Del Tabaco v. Culbro Corp.
In a case arising from a dispute over the ownership of the COHIBA mark on cigars sold in the U.S., denial of motion directing U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to dismiss pending petitions to cancel defendant's registration of the trademark, is affirmed where the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the relief requested.

[09/03] Omega v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
In a copyright infringement action under 17 U.S.C. sections 106(3) and 602(a), grant of summary judgment for defendant is reversed and remanded where non-counterfeit goods were first sold outside the U.S. and then imported for sale in the U.S. without the copyright holder's authorization, thus the first sale doctrine, section 109(a), does not apply.

[09/02] EraGen Bioscience, Inc. v. Nucleic Acids Licensing LLC
In a dispute arising out of a patent licensing agreement that had been purportedly terminated by defendant, the district court's judgment is vacated and remanded where, although defendants did terminate the agreement, the determination of whether termination was wrongful depends on the proper characterization of a "missing" sublicense related to the patents at issue.

More...