 |
|
Some of our wins include: Abbott Laboratories v Syntron Bioresearch, Inc. In a case involving immunoassay technology, we obtained a jury verdict of patent infringement and a permanent injunction on behalf of Abbott Laboratories. Gates Formed-Fibre Products, Inc. v. Delaware Valley Corp. By persuading a jury that the patents in suit were invalid, we successfully defended our client against accusations of infringement concerning a process for making fused-back automotive carpeting. Comair Rotron, Inc. v Matsushita Electric Corp. of America We obtained a $25 million jury verdict against industry giant Panasonic for willful infringement of our client Comair's patents on fans for electronic equipment. Our successful advocacy extends to patent reexaminations and interferences 
Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co. We took part in obtaining a $65 million jury verdict in a case involving the regulation of NFκ-B cell-signaling activity, the largest verdict in Massachusetts that year. A validity challenge led to reversal on appeal. Comair Rotron v. Nippon Densan Corporation and Nidec Corporation After securing a jury verdict of patent infringement, we negotiated a multimillion dollar settlement for our client Comair Rotron. The patent was directed to important magnetization technology for brushless DC electric motors. B. Braun Medical, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories We obtained a jury verdict for Abbott Laboratories, defeating a $30 million patent infringement claim relating to intravenous valve devices. In disputes over brand names, we have also delivered major successes to our clients.
Congratulations to our long-time client Vertex Pharmaceuticals on its recent groundbreaking launch of two life-saving pharmaceutical products: Incivek®, for treatment of hepatitis C, and Kalydeco™, for treatment of cystic fibrosis. Our firm is proud to work closely with Vertex on the development, clearance, and approval of its important brands. More . . .
For our client University of Illinois, we recently obtained US Patent No. 8,045,161, for cutting-edge optical and computational techniques for measuring the polarizability and location of nanoparticles. Polarizability is the property of a particle that describes its rearrangement in an electric field, say, a beam of light. With the emergence of nanoengineering applications as diverse as drug delivery, sensing, and electronics, it has become useful to characterize, not only collective properties of bulk media, but the polarizability of a single particle, even though the particle is smaller than the wavelength of light used to measure it. Read More...
|
|
Internet service providers, accused of displaying text and videos that infringe copyright, still have a safe harbor in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, despite a nominal setback for Google. Viacom v. YouTube
Beyoncé seeks to register a trademark for the name of her new baby, and provides a glimpse at commercialization strategies. More. . .
The Supreme Court clears one obstacle to the market entry of generic drugs: Makers can now seek to compel brand manufacturers to correct overbroad “use codes.” Caraco Pharma v. Novo Nordisk
Inter partes review, introduced by The America Invents Acts, holds the promise of speedy challenges to a patent’s scope. It may also produce claim construction that is binding in related infringement litigation. More. . .
Means-plus-function patent claims for computer-based inventions remain subject to strict standards of validity. Remember to disclose the algorithm! Ergo Licensing v. Carefusion 303
“Best mode” requirement can harshly penalize a patentee who refrains from disclosing the optimal embodiment of his invention. Anvik v. Nikon
Nicole Rizzo Smith recorded a podcast on the Legal Talk Network of her recent article, “Please Refrain From Using My Refrain! Musicians Again Confront Politicians For Unauthorized Use of Songs.”
The effort required for "patent mapping" can pay off in smarter development planning and competitive advantage. More. . .
|
|||
