Cases

LOURIE, Circuit Judge. This appeal has returned to us on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States. In their earlier appearance in this court, Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Ltd. (collectively, “Amgen”) appealed from the decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (1) granting partial judgment on the

CHEN, Circuit Judge, dissenting-in-part. I join the majority opinion except for Parts B.II.b and B.V. To properly inter*1367pret the BPCIA’s patent litigation management process described in section 262(Z), I agree that none of subsection (Z)’s provisions may be read in isolation. In other words, to understand the meaning of any one provision in § 2

PROST, Chief Judge. Appellants Sanofi, Aventisub LLC, Re-generan Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Sanofi-Aventis U.S., LLC (collectively, “Appellants”) appeal from a final judgment of the district court holding U.S. Patent Nos. 8,829,165 (“’165 patent”) and 8,859,741 (“’741 patent”) not invalid and granting a permanent injunction enjoining sales of Appellants’

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 598 U. S. Part 2 Pages 594–616 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT May 18, 2023 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are requ

Case: 20-1074 Document: 132 Page: 1 Filed: 02/11/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ AMGEN INC., AMGEN MANUFACTURING, LIMITED, AMGEN USA, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants v. SANOFI, AVENTISUB LLC, FKA AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS INC., REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS INC., SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC, Defendants-Appe

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 18-2621 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellant v. ABBVIE INC; ABBOTT LABORATORIES; UNIMED PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC; BESINS HEALTHCARE, INC.; *TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC (*Dismissed Pursuant to Court’s 3/12/19 Order.) No. 18-2748 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

*902MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (CORRECTED) MATTHEW F. KENNELLY, District Judge: Defendants in this MDL proceeding are manufacturers, sellers, and promoters of testosterone replacement therapy drugs (TRTs). Nearly all of the plaintiffs have brought lawsuits claiming personal injuries they claim were caused by TRTs. The Court has already ruled on a

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-2402 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ABBVIE INC., et al., Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District C

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 18-2621 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellant v. ABBVIE INC.; ABBOTT LABORATORIES; UNIMED PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC; BESINS HEALTHCARE, INC.; *TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. (*Dismissed Pursuant to Court’s 3/12/19 Order.) No. 18-2748 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

DYK, Circuit Judge. The Mathilda and Terrance Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology Trust (Kennedy) owns U.S. Patent Nos. 7,846,442 (the '442 patent) and 6,270,766 (the '766 patent). Both patents are directed towards methods of treating rheumatoid arthritis by co-administering two drugs. AbbVie, Inc. and AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd. (collectively, AbbVie) are licensees of the '766 pa

OPINION AND ORDER SARA L. ELLIS, United States District Judge Sidney Hillman Health Center of Rochester (“Hillman”) and Teamsters Health Services and Insurance Plan Local 404 (“Local 404,” and collectively with Hillman, the “Funds”) are multi-employer benefit plans and health services funds that provide health benefits, including prescription drug coverage, to their members. The Funds seek to represent a

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PAUL A. CROTTY, District Judge: TABLE OF CONTENTS FINDINGS OF FACT...........................................................434 I. THE PARTIES.........................................................434 II. II. RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS AND ITS TREATMENT ..................434 A. R

Case: 23-1428 Document: 51 Page: 1 Filed: 07/07/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ EGENERA, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee ______________________ 2023-1428 ______________________ Appeal from the United Sta

Case: 24-1965 Document: 76 Page: 1 Filed: 01/29/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee v. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., AMGEN USA, INC., BIOCON BIOLOGICS INC., CELLTRION, INC., FORMYCON AG, AMGEN INC., Defendants SAMSUNG BIOEPIS CO., LTD., Defendant-A

Prost, Chief Judge, dissenting. Because I believe that the district court clearly erred when it found there would not have been a reasonable expectation of success in selecting unsubstituted benzyl for R and unsubstituted methyl for R1, I disagree with the majority that the asserted claims of the '551 patent are patentably distinct from the reference patent claims. I therefore respectfully dissent. I<

Joseph F. Bataillon, Senior United States District Judge This matter is before the court on the following motions: defendant Minerva Surgical, Inc.'s ("Minerva") Motion to Dismiss the '183 Patent and the '989 Patent under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) or for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c) (D.I. 275);1 Minerva's motion for partial summary judgment on: invalidity; non-infringement; n

OPINION STARK, United States District Judge: Plaintiffs — UCB, Inc., UCB BioPharma SPRL, Research Corporation Technologies, Inc., and Harris FRC Corporation (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) — allege that Defendants — Accord Healthcare, Inc., Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Alembic Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC, Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., Auro-bindo Pharma USA,

Savage, J. In this qui tam action brought under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3727 - 33, and various state laws, relators SMSPF, LLC and Panzey Belgium Harris bring claims against pharmaceutical companies, EMD Serono, Inc., and Pfizer, Inc., and marketing consultants and specialists, Quintiles I

STARK, U.S District Judge MorphoSys, Inc. ("MorphoSys" or "Plaintiff") sued Janssen Biotech, Inc., Genmab US, Inc., and Genmab A/S (together, "Janssen" or "Defendants") for infringement of three patents on antibodies that bind to the CD38 protein. (D.I. 205) Pending before the Court are summary judgment motions filed by both sides. Janssen moves for summary judgment of (1) non-infringement of the "human" antibody claims (D.I. 384) a

Newman, Circuit Judge. This appeal is from the dismissal of a declaratory judgment action filed by AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Inc. ("Healthcare" or "AHF") against Gilead Sciences, Inc. et al. ("Defendants") in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 1 On appellate review,