Tag: claim construction
-
Socket Solutions v. Import Global: Federal Circuit Demands Doctrinal Discipline Before Granting Preliminary Patent Injunctions
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Socket Solutions, LLC v. Import Global, LLC, Case No. 2025-1121 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 4, 2026), illustrates that preliminary patent injunctions do not alter the governing standards of claim construction or equitable relief. Because a preliminary injunction can remove products from the marketplace long before infringement has been finally adjudicated, courts…
-
Board of Regents v. Boston Scientific: Federal Circuit Reverses Jury Verdict on Anticipation and the Meaning of “Fiber”
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Board of Regents of the University of Texas System v. Boston Scientific Corp., Case Nos. 2024-2062 and 2024-2063 (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2026), reverses a patent-infringement judgment involving drug-eluting coronary stents and illustrates how a jury verdict cannot survive when the asserted distinctions from the prior art are absent from…
-
Ridge Corp. v. Kirk NationaLease: Federal Circuit Rejects Preliminary Injunction Based on Claim Construction and Speculative Harm
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Ridge Corp. v. Kirk NationaLease Co., Case No. 25-1254 (Fed. Cir. July 13, 2026), reverses a preliminary injunction against competing manufacturers of roll-up truck doors, holding that substantial questions of noninfringement and an inadequately supported claim of irreparable harm prevented the patent owner and its licensee from obtaining extraordinary pretrial…
-
Wyeth v. AstraZeneca: Federal Circuit Invalidates Cancer-Treatment Claims for Failure to Enable Patient Dosing
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Wyeth LLC v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Case No. 2024-2325 (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2026), affirms that a patent claiming daily administration of a therapeutically effective drug dosage to a patient must teach more than laboratory activity and broad projected dosage ranges. The specification must provide sufficient guidance for a skilled…
-
TrackTime v. Amazon.com: Federal Circuit Requires Contextual § 112(f) Analysis for Software Claim Terms
The Federal Circuit’s decision in TrackTime, LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC, Case No. 2024-1102 (Fed. Cir. July 2, 2026), clarifies how courts must determine whether software claim language invokes means-plus-function treatment under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f), particularly when a claim recites “executable program code” configured to perform specified operations. The court vacated a judgment that…
-
Otsuka v. Hetero Labs: Federal Circuit Upholds Patent Injunction but Requires Rule 65(c) Bond
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Hetero Labs Limited, Case No. 2025-2016 (Fed. Cir. July 1, 2026), upheld a preliminary injunction delaying the launch of a generic version of Nuedexta but vacated the district court’s decision allowing the patent owner to obtain that injunction without posting security under Federal Rule of…
-
Actelion v. Mylan: Federal Circuit Limits Equivalents Theory After Ambiguous pH Claim Construction
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 24-1641 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2026), provides an important reminder that scientific terminology in patent claims is not interpreted in a vacuum. Even seemingly straightforward numerical limitations can become highly contextual when industry standards, measurement conventions, and prosecution history intersect. In…
-
VLSI v. Intel: Federal Circuit Enforces Litigation Stipulations and Narrows Prosecution Disclaimer
The Federal Circuit’s decision in VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation, Case No. 24-1772 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 14, 2026), is a significant reminder that procedural decisions made early in patent litigation can later become outcome determinative. In a partially precedential opinion authored by Chief Judge Moore, the court reversed multiple summary judgment rulings that had…
-
Columbia University v. Gen Digital: $185M Cybersecurity Patent Verdict Reopened and Trial Counsel Sanctions Vacated
A pair of related decisions issued by the Federal Circuit in Trustees of Columbia University v. Gen Digital Inc. , Nos. 24-1243, -1244 (Fed. Cir. Mar 11, 2026), address two issues that often arise together in complex patent litigation: the evolving scope of patent eligibility under Alice, and the limits of sanctions imposed on litigation…
-
Magnolia v. Kurin: Separately Listed Claim Elements Require Separate Structures
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. v. Kurin, Inc., No. 2024-2001 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 6, 2026) reinforces a claim construction principle that appears simple but has far-reaching consequences in patent litigation: when claim elements are listed separately, the ordinary implication is that the elements correspond to separate structures. The decision also illustrates the…