Abstracts » Law

The right to a jury trial in actions under the Hatch-Waxman Act

Article Abstract:

The Hatch-Waxman Act links patent with food and drug laws to create a new cause of action for patent infringement under Patent Code section 271(e)(2) which is clearly equitable and not amenable to jury trial. The Act limits relief to equitable injunctive and discretionary remedies to be determined by the courts. The 7th Amendment right to jury trial does not apply to cases under section 271(e)(2) because it is only applicable to cases at law. Legal issues do not arise from requests for declaratory judgments or defenses under the section.

Drug approval

---

Means plus function claims after Markman: is claim construction under 35 U.S.C. section 112, paragraph 6 a question of fact or an issue of law?

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court in Markman v. Westview Instruments implicitly determined that means-plus-function claim limitations under Patent Code section 112, paragraph 6 should be construed by courts as a matter of law. The four factors the Court employed to determine legal or factual justiciability can be used to conclude that paragraph 12 issues should be construed by courts. This is consistent with the law regarding interpretations of other claim limitations.

---

Eli Lilly v. Barr Labs: is a new use of an old compound no longer patentable?

Article Abstract:

In the case of Eli Lilly & Co. v. Barr Labs, Inc., the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided that Eli Lilly recieved double patents on the drug Prozac. However, the C ourt made errors in interpreting patent law regarding what test it should use to determine double patenting.

Patents & copyrights

Some parts © 2012 Advameg, Inc.