teva, theodore roosevelt, aero prods., bancorp

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1638 Ex Parte Tanaka et al 10979542 - (D) SCHEINER 103 FAY SHARPE LLP PAGE, BRENT T

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1776 Ex Parte Benesch et al 11091737 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 Air Liquide Linda K. Russell ORLANDO, AMBER ROSE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3741 Ex Parte Rising 11454698 - (D) WEATHERLY 103 Siemens Corporation NGUYEN, ANDREW H

3775 Ex Parte Holloway et al 11396554 - (D) OSINSKI 103 DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP BOLES, SAMEH RAAFAT

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1649 Ex Parte Venema et al 11170166 - (D) FREDMAN 112(1) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP ULM, JOHN D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Head 11325646 - (D) HOELTER 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. BAYOU, AMENE SETEGNE

3767 Ex Parte MacLean et al 11785504 - (D) HASTINGS 103 LAW OFFICE OF LOUIS WOO CARPENTER, WILLIAM R  

FEDERAL CIRCUIT  

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1941 1636 SANOFI-AVENTIS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GENENTECH, INC., Defendant-Appellant, AND BIOGEN IDEC INC., Defendant. 2012-1454 5,849,522 08/467,143 6,218,140 08/338,213 REYNA concurring DYK denial of anti-suit injunction FINNEGAN HENDERSON FARABOW GARRETT AND DUNNER LEITH, NANCY J; GUZO, DAVID

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
2765 3624 3624 3693 CLS BANK INTERNATIONAL, Plaintiff-Appellee, AND CLS SERVICES LTD., Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee, v. ALICE CORPORATION PTY. LTD., Defendant-Appellant. 2011-1301 5,970,479 08/070,136 6,912,510 09/567,507 7,149,720 10/331,331 7,725,375 11/166,387 PER CURIAM 101 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX PLLC MACDONALD, ALLEN R; SNAPP, SANDRA S; HAVAN, THU THAO; WONG, ERIC TAK WAI

We review the grant or denial of summary judgment applying the law of the relevant regional circuit. Teva Pharm. Indus. v. AstraZeneca Pharm. LP, 661 F.3d 1378, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2011). The D.C. Circuit considers a district court’s grant of summary judgment without deference. Theodore Roosevelt Conservation P’ship v. Salazar, 661 F.3d 66, 72 (D.C. Cir. 2011). We apply our own law, however, with respect to issues of substantive patent law. Aero Prods. Int’l, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp., 466 F.3d 1000, 1016 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Patent eligibility under § 101 presents an issue of law that we review de novo. Bancorp Servs., LLC v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can., 687 F.3d 1266, 1273 (Fed. Cir. 2012).