Tag: intellectual-property
-
LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA HOLDINGS v. QIAGEN SCIENCES, LLC
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Docket: 23-2350 Opinion Date: August 13, 2025 The case concerns two patents related to methods for preparing DNA samples for sequencing, owned by Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, Labcorp Genetics, Inc., and The General Hospital Corporation. The patents describe techniques for enriching specific regions of DNA to make sequencing…
-
Mondis Technology Ltd. v. LG Electronics Inc.
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Docket: 23-2117 Opinion Date: August 8, 2025 The dispute centers on allegations by Mondis Technology Ltd. and related entities that LG Electronics Inc. and its U.S. subsidiary infringed claims 14 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 7,475,180. The patent describes a display unit, such as a computer monitor, that…
-
AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. SYNTHEGO CORP.
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Docket: 23-2186 Opinion Date: June 11, 2025 Judge: Sharon Prost Agilent Technologies, Inc. appealed two final written decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) that determined all claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,337,001 and 10,900,034 to be unpatentable. The patents in question relate to CRISPR-Cas systems for gene…
-
Supreme Court Case Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi Summary and Its Implication in Biotech Patents
The United States Supreme Court case, Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, has significant implications for patent law, particularly in the realm of pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. This case revolved around the enablement requirement of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 112 (a). Background Amgen and Sanofi, two pharmaceutical giants, each obtained a patent in 2011 for the antibody…
-
The Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. Case: A Landmark Decision in Patent Law
The Supreme Court’s decision in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. has far-reaching implications for patent law, particularly concerning the doctrine of assignor estoppel. This case, decided in June 2021, centered around the question of whether the doctrine of assignor estoppel should be retained, modified, or eliminated altogether. This blog post provides an overview of the case,…
-
Understanding the Impact of Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies on Patent Litigation
The Supreme Court’s decision in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies has significant implications for the landscape of patent litigation, particularly concerning the doctrine of inter partes review (IPR). This case, decided in April 2020, addressed the question of whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) can determine whether a petition for IPR is timely…
EPIMED RESEARCH 