Insights

Washington – August 17, 2023: The 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® has recognized 47 firm lawyers as "Best Lawyers" and 41 lawyers as “Ones to Watch.”

Washington – August 19, 2021: The 2022 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® has recognized 53 firm lawyers as "Best Lawyers" and 13 lawyers as “Ones to Watch.” The publication also named partner William H. Frankel the Best Lawyers 2022 Copyright Law "Lawyer of the Year" in Chicago.

Washington – August 20, 2020: The 2021 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® has named two Crowell & Moring lawyers – Laura A. Foggan and Paul W. Mourning– as a "Lawyer of the Year" in their respective categories and regions. The publication also recognized 46 firm lawyers as "Best Lawyers" and nine lawyers as “Ones to Watch.”

Unitary Patents are being granted and the Unified Patent Court is up and running as of June 1, 2023.  Since the 1970’s, there have been attempts at establishing a unitary European patent that would cover multiple European countries and would be enforced by a single court system.  This type of system is in contrast to the system known since 1973 of granting European Patents by the European Patent Office (EPO) and validating the European Patent in designated European countries, wherein each validated patent is enforced in the national court associated with the validated patent.

With the rapid spread of COVID-19, federal, state and local governments have been scrambling to ensure that the country is equipped with adequate resources to help mitigate the spread of the virus and treat those who have fallen ill. The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) was enacted in 2005 and serves as a means of incentivizing contributions of much-needed resources in such times of crisis. The PREP Act authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to issue a Declaration immunizing individuals and entities from liability associated with the use of medical countermeasures. Specifically, “Covered Persons” cannot be held liable for any claim of loss “caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from” the development, testing, manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of designated “Covered Countermeasures” within the Secretary’s specified period of emergency.

Appellate advocacy differs in many ways from earlier phases of a litigation. Perhaps the most significant differences can be observed during oral arguments. Time constraints combined with an extensive record and the high stakes at issue in an appeal can pose significant challenges for counsel and the panel of judges alike. To further streamline this process, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit published an updated version of its Oral Argument Guide (located here). Although this new version modifies the Court’s guidelines in several respects, the Court’s summary signals the main focus to be on “a revised Courtroom Decorum Policy and new Guidelines for Counsel During Argument.” See Updated Argument Resources (last visited Jan. 29, 2020).

Washington, D.C.-based partners, Terry Rea, of Crowell & Moring's Intellectual Property Group, and Keith J. Harrison, of the firm's Labor & Employment and Litigation groups, weigh in on two important cases in the life sciences arena. Harrison discusses Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.'s challenge of a California appellate decision that a generic-drug manufacturer can be held liable for failing to warn consumers of the side effects listed on the equivalent brand-name drug, which may potentially be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court. "This is going to be a case that is going to further define the scope of federal preemption," Harrison said. Additionally, Rea talks about the Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC suit, which argues that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board uses the incorrect standard during America Invents Act (AIA) proceedings, making it difficult for inventors to retain their patents. "Everybody is going to be very, very careful how they handle this [case]," Rea said of the suit, which may upend new IPR standards.

The 67th Annual Spring Meeting of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law is the world's largest meeting of competition and consumer protection professionals. The Spring Meeting brings together all segments of the global competition and consumer protection community - enforcement officials, private attorneys, in-house corporate counsel, academics, judges, economists, and business people - to share knowledge about all aspects of competition and consumer protection law.

BDO and Crowell & Moring are proud to present a networking opportunity and a panel discussion on IP Strategy for the BioPharma Industry. This is a "must attend" event for hearing and discussing the company perspective from companies engaged in drug, vaccine, biologic, or medical device research and product development. IP and the strategy to procure and sustain it is one of the most critical aspects to revenue generation and commercial success. Our panel members are admired veterans in this field and will present intriguing case studies that will emphasize lessons learned and practical solutions to creating a successful IP strategy.

Nearly three years after the passage of the American Invents Act (AIA) there is little doubt that it has changed the patent landscape.  Inter partes reviews in particular have proven to be a significant tool to challenge patent validity, particularly given the outcomes to date and lesser cost compared to district court litigation.  Now that the United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued its first wave of final written decisions, a retrospective analysis of the decisions (and the litigation leading up to them) provides several useful insights.