Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Alex M. Grabowski
GlaxoSmithKline v. Glenmark Pharms
Addressing objections to a magistrate’s report and recommendation, a Delaware district court held that a generic manufacturer’s label showing an intent to induce infringement was not enough on its own to establish induced infringement in a post-launch case, and that evidence of actual inducement was required. GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Glenmark Pharms. Inc., USA, Case No. 14-cv-877 (D. Del., June 9, 2017) (Stark, J).
Looking Beyond the Label for Inducement in Post-Launch Case
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Already signed up? Log in here By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources.
That’s How the Prima Facie Obviousness Cookie Crumbles
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Already signed up? Log in here By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources.
Patent Owner Must Be Subject to Personal Jurisdiction for Declaratory Judgment
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Already signed up? Log in here By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources.
New Jersey Court Rules That a Parent Company Is Still on the Hook for Divested Subsidiary’s ANDA Filing
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Already signed up? Log in here By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources.
Attempt to Set Aside Judgment Yields Exceptional Case Award
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Already signed up? Log in here By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources.
Infringement Does Not Mean Injunction
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Already signed up? Log in here By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources.
Nichia Corp. v. Everlight Americas: Infringement Does Not Mean Injunction
Addressing claim construction and injunction issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that the defendant’s LED technology infringed plaintiff’s patent, and that the district court did not err in finding a lack of irreparable harm. Nichia Corp. v. Everlight Americas, Inc., Case Nos. 16-1585; -1618 (Fed. Cir., Apr. 28, 2017) (Stoll, J).
Intellectual Ventures Loses Claims Based on § 101, Collateral Estoppel, Standing
Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Already signed up? Log in here By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources.
Intellectual Ventures Loses Claims Based on § 101, Collateral Estoppel, Standing
In a pair of decisions handed down on the same day by Chief Judge Prost, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit struck down a raft of claims on the basis of various doctrines, including patent ineligibility, collateral estoppel and standing. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Financial Corp., Case No. 16-1077 (Fed. Cir., Mar. 7, 2017) (Prost, CJ); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., Case No. 16-1128 (Fed. Cir., Mar. 7, 2017) (Prost, CJ).
ITC Sanctions for “Staggering” Destruction of Evidence Upheld
Addressing the imposition of sanctions for spoliation in a US International Trade Commission (ITC) case, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the ITC’s imposition of default judgment sanctions and an exclusion order for the willful destruction of evidence, twice citing the administrative law judge’s characterization of the behavior as “gross bad faith.” Organik Kimya, San. Ve Tic. A.S. v. ITC, Case No. 15-1774 (Fed. Cir., Feb. 15, 2017) (O’Malley, J).
Wrong Inventor Defense Fails in Pharmaceutical Litigation
Addressing derivation and obviousness issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of a generic drug manufacturer’s attempt to invalidate a patent based on the theory that the claimed invention was the result of an exchange with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) during the drug’s approval process, rather than the named inventor’s idea. Cumberland Pharms. Inc. v. Mylan Institutional LLC, Case No. 16-1155 (Fed. Cir., Jan. 26, 2017) (Taranto, J.).
Conception and Reduction to Practice, and the Limits of the Hearsay Doctrine
In a decision clarifying the borders of the hearsay doctrine, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) decision to exclude certain emails used as evidence of an earlier conception date on hearsay grounds, finding that those email communications had separate legal significance, were probative of and relevant to an issue in the case, and were not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. REG Synthetic Fuels, LLC v.
REG Synthetic Fuels, LLC v. Neste Oil OYJ: Conception and Reduction to Practice, and the Limits of the Hearsay Doctrine
In a decision clarifying the borders of the hearsay doctrine, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) decision to exclude certain emails used as evidence of an earlier conception date on hearsay grounds, finding that those email communications had separate legal significance, were probative of and relevant to an issue in the case, and were not being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. REG Synthetic Fuels, LLC v.
Health Care Employees at Frontline in Battle Against Ransomware
As recent noteworthy attacks have shown, no health care organization or provider is safe from ransomware threats, and the results of an attack can be devastating. Ransomware is a virus which limits or eliminates access to data and typically is introduced into a computer system by acceptance of an electronic communication. Once the virus is deployed, the owner is charged a ransom to regain the data or access to it.
History Repeating Itself at the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently decided to review a pair of cases that challenge the Federal Circuit’s willful infringement test. The two cases, Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc, (14-1513) and Stryker Corporation v. Zimmer, Inc. (14-1520), are drawing comparisons from commentators to the Court’s Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health and Fitness, Inc. ruling last term based on the similar structure of the tests and statutory language reviewed in both cases.
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Alex M.
Contact Alex M., search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack