Time For High Court To Clarify Presumption Of Patent Validity

Law360, New York (April 25, 2017, 5:09 PM EDT) —   Charles Macedo Sandra Hudak In Microsoft Corp. v. i4i LP, 564 U.S. 91 (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court considered the role of the presumption of validity for patents, codified in 35 U.S.C. § 282. The Supreme Court’s discussion of this presumption clarified that it applies not only to validity challenges under […]

In The Press:
IPWATCHDOG Turns to Partner Charles R. Macedo for his Insights on SCOTUS decision in Sandoz v. Amgen over Biosimlar Drugs

Industry Reaction to SCOTUS decision in Sandoz v. Amgen By Gene Quinn   Charles R. Macedo Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP In Sandoz v. Amgen, the Supreme Court addressed the “plain language” of a “carefully crafted and detailed enforcement scheme” relating to “biologic” drugs. Under this complex statute that was enacted as part of ObamaCare as […]

Patent Law Alert: In Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., U.S. Supreme Court Held That Supply of a Single Component of a Multicomponent Invention for Manufacture Abroad Does Not Give Rise to Liability for Patent Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(1)

On February 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., unanimously reversing the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision that the supply of a single component of a multicomponent invention for manufacture abroad may trigger liability for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. […]

ARE Copyright Law Alert:Supreme Court Clarifies Standard of “Separability” for Copyright Protection for Features Incorporated into Design of Useful Article

On March 22, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., affirming the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit which held that graphic designs appearing on cheerleading uniforms were copyrightable.  Slip op. at 2-3.  The Court provided long […]