December 10, 2013
Westlaw Topical Highlights for Intellectual Property provides summaries of significant federal court decisions and legislative and administrative activities affecting Intellectual Property law. A Westlaw subscription is required to access the documents linked from this page.
Damages: Patent owner was entitled to more than $76 million in damages for infringement of gastrointestinal drug omeprazole. Astrazeneca AB v. Apotex Corp. 2013 WL 6244425 (S.D.N.Y.) A patent owner demonstrated that it would not have licensed a generic drug manufacturer that infringed the patent for the gastrointestinal drug omeprazole for any less than 50% of the defendant’s profits, and thus showed that it was entitled to damages in the amount of more than $76 million, plus pre-judgment interest, pursuant to the hypothetical negotiation approach for determining a reasonable royalty. The plaintiff had received a step royalty offer ranging from 7% to 40% for the sale of an over-the-counter omeprazole product, and the product met expectations that triggered the 40% rate. In addition, the plaintiff had received royalty offers ranging from 50% to 70% of profits for the sale of generic omeprazole, and also received the equivalent of a 54% royalty in settlement from another infringer. 2013 WL 6244425. The full-text of the rest of the Topical Highlights are available within Westlaw Next, subscription required).
Name or Likeness: Use of similar trade name on perfume products did not infringe on trademark. Harp v. Rahme 2013 WL 6169561 (E.D.Pa..)
Pleading: First-to-file rule barred alleged infringer’s claim for declaratory judgment that it was third-party beneficiary. Futurewei Technologies, Inc. v. Acacia Research Corp. 2013 WL 6231549 (C.A.Fed. (Cal.))
Computers and Electronics: Patent eligibility for computer-implemented inventions embodying abstract ideas—Certiorari Granted. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Intern. 2013 WL 4776518 (U.S.)
Assignments and Licensing: Copyright assignee’s agreement with siblings of Superman’s co-creator superseded co-creator’s prior assignment. DC Comics v. Pacific Pictures Corp. 2013 WL 6098416 (C.A.9 (Cal.))