When Did Medical Innovation Become a Bad Thing?

Congress has been holding hearings on pharmaceutical patents and drug prices, along with U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) fee-setting and oversight. During these hearings, America’s pharmaceutical innovators face an unusual criticism: They are accused of abusing the patent system not only when they invent new medicines, but also when they improve them.

Other Barks & Bites for Friday, October 2: Third Circuit Unseals AI Fair Use Ruling; U.S. Stays Third in WIPO GII 2026; and Apple Hit With $5.7 Billion Verdict for Haptic Tech Infringement

This week in Other Barks & Bites: the Federal Circuit affirms the invalidation of twist drill patent claims because the challenged patent could not claim priority to a parent patent application qualifying as prior art; the Third Circuit unseals its ruling against ROSS Intelligence’s fair use defense indicating some limitations to the decision’s holding in the generative AI context;

‘Indefiniteness is Not the Same as Impossibility,’ Says CAFC

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Thursday issued a precedential decision affirming a finding of invalidity of certain claims of Satius Holding, LLC’s wireless communications patent, but holding that the district court’s reasoning, which focused on indefiniteness, was erroneous.

CAFC Says Trade Secret Owner Forfeited Tortious Interference, Damages Arguments

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Truinject Corp. v. Galderma S.A., affirming a U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware judgment for Galderma S.A. on tortious interference, breach of contract, and trade secret misappropriation claims. The CAFC held that Truinject Corporation forfeited its arguments on appeal about the dismissal of its tortious interference claim and the summary judgment of no damages.

The True Cost of Patent Infringement Litigation: Enforcement and Defense in a Complex Market

Patent infringement litigation is often discussed in terms of high-profile disputes or headline verdicts. What receives less attention is the cost of getting there. Whether a company is enforcing its patent rights or defending against a claim, the financial impact of patent litigation can be significant long before a case ever reaches trial. For many businesses, particularly those operating in technology-driven industries, patent litigation is no longer just a legal issue. It is a business consideration that can influence strategy, resource allocation and long-term planning.

Federal Circuit Dismisses Patent Owner’s Appeal for Lack of Final Judgment Under Rule 54(b)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision today in ParkerVision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated dismissing ParkerVision’s appeal from a judgment of non-infringement for lack of appellate jurisdiction. The CAFC determined that a partial final judgment entered under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) was not final, since it resolved infringement of only some claims of a single patent. The CAFC also denied ParkerVision’s request to reassign the case to a different district judge on remand.

CAFC Says District Court Failed to Provide Sufficient Reasoning for Denying Sanctions, Attorney’s Fees

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision Wednesday vacating and remanding a district court ruling that had denied Pen-Tech Associates, Inc.’s motion for sanctions and attorney’s fees due to Epic Tech, LLC’s allegedly frivolous infringement claims. The CAFC found the district court had provided “insufficient detail to permit meaningful review.”

Subscribe to IPWatchdog

This is the best way to stay informed. We send a daily roundup of our latest news, press releases, and events.

Get Email Updates