This case involves a patent infringement dispute between Pfizer and Teva over Teva's proposed generic version of Viagra, which allegedly infringed Pfizer's U.S. Patent No. 6,469,012 for treating erectile dysfunction. After the court previously ruled that the patent was valid and infringed, Pfizer moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to amend the judgment to specify that the effective approval date for Teva's Abbreviated New Drug Application could not be earlier than the patent's expiration, as required by 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(4)(A). Teva opposed this and proposed alternative language tying the approval date to a potential Federal Circuit decision invalidating certain patent claims. The court granted Pfizer's motion and denied Teva's request, holding that the statute mandates setting the effective date no earlier than the patent expiration upon a finding of infringement and that Teva's proposed modifications were not supported by the statutory language or necessary to prevent injustice.
This case involved a Virginia state court action by a hotel condominium association against an insurance underwriter at Lloyd's for declaratory judgment and breach of contract arising from an insurance policy. After the state court dismissed non-diverse parties, creating complete diversity, the defendant filed a counterclaim in state court and then removed the case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441. The plaintiff moved to remand, arguing that the defendant's filing of the counterclaim waived its right to remove. The court granted remand, holding that under Fourth Circuit precedent the voluntary counterclaim demonstrated a clear intent to submit to state court jurisdiction and thus waived removal, even though removal was otherwise timely and jurisdictionally proper. The court denied both parties' requests for costs and attorneys' fees, finding the removal issue not objectively unreasonable given the lack of controlling circuit precedent directly on point.
This case concerns the salvage rights of R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. (RMST) to artifacts recovered from the wreck of the R.M.S. Titanic during expeditions in 1993, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2004. In a prior ruling, the court awarded RMST a 100% salvage award equal to the fair market value of the artifacts but reserved the method of payment and the possibility of a judicial sale. After a year passed with no buyer expressing interest in purchasing the collection at fair market value while preserving it for the public, the court found that monetary proceeds would be inadequate to satisfy the award. Accordingly, the court granted RMST title to the artifacts, subject to covenants and conditions negotiated with the United States.
Pfizer sued Teva for imminent infringement of its '012 patent, which claims methods of orally administering certain compounds including sildenafil to treat erectile dysfunction. Teva stipulated to infringement at trial but asserted counterclaims that the patent claims were invalid due to inequitable conduct during prosecution before the PTO, including alleged failures to disclose foreign litigation materials. The court applied the Therasense standards for materiality and specific intent to deceive, examined the actions of Pfizer's patent counsel in sorting and submitting references, and determined that the evidence did not establish the required intent or egregious misconduct. Accordingly, the court rejected the inequitable conduct defense and upheld the validity of the disputed claims.
This case involves a patent infringement suit brought by Fox Group against Cree concerning two patents ('130 and '026) related to methods for growing low-defect silicon carbide crystals used in semiconductors. Fox alleged that Cree's products infringed claims of both patents and sought damages and an injunction. The court had previously entered judgment of non-infringement for Cree on the '026 patent, rendering that portion of Cree's summary judgment motion moot. On the remaining issues for the '130 patent, the court granted Cree's motion for summary judgment after construing the claims and determining that the asserted claims were anticipated and rendered invalid by Cree's own prior public disclosures in a 1996 paper, which described the same low defect densities without requiring additional proof of commercialization.
This case involves Dragas Management Corp. seeking coverage from Citizens Insurance and Hanover Insurance for remediation costs after Chinese drywall installed by a subcontractor emitted sulfur gases that corroded metal components and caused other property damage in seventy-four homes. DMC had obtained an arbitration award against the subcontractor and sought to recover from the insurers' commercial general liability and umbrella policies. The court granted the insurers' motion for partial summary judgment on the policies containing absolute pollution exclusions. The core reasoning was that the policy language excluded coverage for property damage arising from the discharge or release of pollutants, and the sulfur gases qualified as pollutants under the defined terms, applying Virginia contract interpretation rules.
