The Technology & Information Law Blog

Analysis by Charles Gideon Korrell

  • Janssen v. Teva: Federal Circuit Affirms Validity of Paliperidone Palmitate Dosing Regimen Patent

    ·

    In a significant ruling for pharmaceutical patent litigation, the Federal Circuit in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Nos. 25-1228, 25-1252 (Fed. Cir. July 8, 2025), affirmed the district court’s determination that U.S. Patent No. 9,439,906 (“the ’906 patent”)—which claims specific dosing regimens for long-acting injectable formulations of the antipsychotic paliperidone palmitate—is not…

    Continue reading →


  • Egenera, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.: Federal Circuit Affirms Noninfringement Verdict on All Asserted Claims

    ·

    In a resounding victory for Cisco Systems, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that Cisco’s Unified Computing System (“UCS”) does not infringe U.S. Patent No. 7,231,430, held by Egenera, Inc. The decision, issued on July 7, 2025, capped nearly a decade of litigation over Egenera’s patented “virtual processing area network” technology. The ruling…

    Continue reading →


  • Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC: “Consisting Essentially Of” Precludes Other Active Ingredients

    ·

    In a significant reversal for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), in Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC the Federal Circuit on June 30, 2025, held that the Board erred in its construction of the transitional claim phrase “consisting essentially of” as used in Eye Therapies, LLC’s U.S.…

    Continue reading →


  • Realtek Semiconductor Corp. v. ITC: Federal Circuit Declines Jurisdiction Over Sanctions Appeal

    ·

    In Realtek Semiconductor Corporation v. International Trade Commission, No. 23-1187 (Fed. Cir. June 18, 2025), the Federal Circuit dismissed Realtek’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that a denied sanctions request under Section 337(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930 is not reviewable by the Federal Circuit when it is not tied to a final…

    Continue reading →


  • Optis Cellular Technology v. Apple Inc.: Federal Circuit Orders New Trial on Infringement and Damages Due to Unanimity Violation and Improper Evidence

    ·

    The Federal Circuit’s June 16, 2025, decision in Optis Cellular Technology, LLC v. Apple Inc., Nos. 2022-1904, 2022-1925, vacates a $300 million damages judgment in a high-stakes standard-essential patent (SEP) case and mandates a new trial on both infringement and damages. The court found that the Eastern District of Texas violated Apple’s constitutional right to…

    Continue reading →


  • Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. Roku, Inc.: Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB Decision on Licensing Nexus in Obviousness Analysis

    ·

    In the June 16, 2025 decision of Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. Roku, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded two inter partes review (IPR) decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that had found claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,411,941—owned by Ancora Technologies, Inc.—to be unpatentable as obvious. While the Federal Circuit affirmed…

    Continue reading →


  • V.O.S. Selections v. Trump: Sets Expedited En Banc Review of Tariff Orders After Staying CIT’s Injunction

    ·

    In V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, the Federal Circuit has now stayed the Court of International Trade’s injunctions and agreed to hear the government’s appeal on an expedited basis before the full court. This appeal by the Trump Administration follows the CIT’s landmark ruling that certain Executive Orders imposing tariffs were unlawful and issued a…

    Continue reading →


  • Mitek Systems, Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association: No Standing for Declaratory Non-Infringement Claims Based on Indirect Liability or Customer Indemnity

    ·

    In a detailed and precedent-reinforcing opinion issued on June 12, 2025, the Federal Circuit in Mitek Systems, Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association, No. 23-1687, affirmed the dismissal of Mitek’s declaratory judgment action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court held that Mitek failed to establish a justiciable controversy under Article III and the Declaratory…

    Continue reading →


  • United Services Automobile Association v. PNC Bank N.A.: Federal Circuit Invalidates Mobile Check Deposit Patent as Abstract and Non-Inventive

    ·

    In United Services Automobile Association v. PNC Bank N.A., the Federal Circuit reversed a district court ruling that had upheld the patent eligibility of United Services Automobile Association’s (“USAA”) mobile check deposit patent, holding instead that the asserted claim of U.S. Patent No. 10,402,638 (“the ’638 patent”) was directed to an abstract idea and lacked…

    Continue reading →


  • Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Synthego Corp.: Federal Circuit Reinforces Written Description and Motivation to Combine Standards

    ·

    The Federal Circuit vacated and reversed key findings by the PTAB in a suite of post-grant challenges brought against Agilent Technologies’ patents on CRISPR-related RNA purification methods. The decision in Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Synthego Corp., Nos. 23-1916, -1917, -1918, -1919, and -2043, addresses recurring issues in PTAB proceedings: how to properly assess written description…

    Continue reading →