Last week, the Federal Circuit confirmed that Idenix Pharmaceuticals will not be the proud recipient of what was previously regarded as the largest damages award ever recorded in a U.S. 
patent case. In fact, the majority’s opinion in Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Gilead Sciences Inc. not only affirmed the district court’s grant of judgment as
The legal meaning of the transition language “consisting essentially of” is well-established in Federal Circuit case law and is generally construed to mean that the composition or formulation (a) necessarily includes the listed ingredients and (b) is open to unlisted ingredients that do not materially affect the basic and novel properties of the composition. Similarly,
As discussed in a previous blog post, since Mayo v. Prometheus, critics of medical treatment patents have advocated that such patents should be banned from patenting. While such arguments seemed futile based on the consistent position taken by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) that treating a disease or