Markman

Subscribe to Markman

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in United Therapeutics Corporation v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc., Civil Action No. 20-755-RGA (D.Del. November 18, 2021), the Court issued its claim construction of the two remaining disputed terms of U.S. Patent No. 9,604,901 (“the ‘901 patent”) relating to “an improved process to convert benzindene…

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Conformis, Inc. v. Medacta USA, Inc., Civil Action No. 19-1528-RGA (D.Del. March 4, 2021), The Honorable Richard G. Andrews construed the remaining terms in dispute in the four (4) patents-in-suit, U.S. Patent Nos. 8,377,129 (“the ‘129 patent”), 8,460,304 (“the ‘304 patent”), 9,186,161 (“the ‘161 patent”), and 9,295,482 (“the ‘482 patent”),…

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Allergan USA, Inc. et al. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., et al., Civil Action No. 19-1727-RGA (D.Del. January 11, 2021), The Honorable Richard G. Andrews construed the five (5) remaining terms in dispute in the six (6) patents-in-suit, U.S. Patent Nos. 8,691,860 (“the ‘860 patent”), 9,115,091 (“the ‘091 patent”), 9,364,489 (“the…

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in Genentech, Inc. et al. v. Amgen Inc., Civil Action No. 17-1407-CFC, Consolidated (D.Del. March 9, 2020), the Court issued its claim construction opinion construing the remaining disputed claim term, “following fermentation,” in the patent-in-suit, United States Patent Number 8,574,869. Based on the extrinsic…

By Memorandum Order entered in Trimr, LLC v. PerfectShaker, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 18-1640-MN (D.Del., October 28, 2019), The Honorable Maryellen Noreika construed three (3) terms in dispute in the patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 9,839,888 (“the ‘888 Patent”).

A complete copy of the Memorandum Order is attached.

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. v. Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 17-275-LPS (D.Del. June 12, 2019), the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the portion of the Court’s Claim Construction Order that determined that the term “kinetic steps”…

By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered by The Honorable Maryellen Noreika in Agrofresh Inc. v. Mirtech, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 16-662-MN-SRF (D.Del. January 2, 2019), the Court overruled-in-part and sustained-in-part Plaintiff’s objections to Magistrate Judge Sherry Fallon’s Claim Construction Report and Recommendation (D.I. 247). The Court ultimately entered its Markman ruling construing…

By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered by The Honorable Maryellen Noreika in Invensas Corporation v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., Civil Action No. 17-1363-MN (D.Del. November 16, 2018), the Court entered its Markman ruling construing three (3) terms in dispute in U.S. Patent Numbers 6,232,231 (“the ‘231 Patent”) and 6,849,946 (“the ‘946 Patent”).…

By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Enzo Life Sciences, Inc. v. Hologic Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 16-894-LPS-CJB (D.Del. October 15, 2018), the Court entered its Markman ruling construing eight (8) terms in dispute in U.S. Patent No. 6,221,581 (“the ‘581 patent”).

Copies of the Memorandum…

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Civil Action No. 17-389-RGA (D.Del. June 29, 2018), the Court rendered its Markman ruling construing three (3) terms in dispute in the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,778,962 (“the ‘962 patent”) and 8,617,598…