Insights

Chicago – June 2, 2026: Intellectual Asset Management recognized Crowell & Moring in its IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Practitioners guide, awarding a gold band ranking for patent litigation and transactions in Belgium, a silver band ranking for patent litigation and recommended for patent prosecution in Illinois, and a bronze band ranking for patent prosecution in the United Kingdom: England and Wales. The firm was also recommended nationally in the United States for trade secrets litigation.

Los Angeles – May 20, 2026: The Daily Journal has named Crowell & Moring's Valerie Goo and Jon Gurka as Top Intellectual Property Lawyers in California in 2026. The annual list recognizes California lawyers who have made significant contributions to intellectual property law over the past year. 

Washington – August 20, 2025: The 2026 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® has recognized 44 Crowell & Moring lawyers as "Best Lawyers." 

Patent claims must be clear and definite, as they set the boundaries of the patentee’s rights. Occasionally, however, claim language contains errors, such as typographical mistakes or incorrect numbering. Courts possess very limited authority to correct such errors. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has emphasized that judicial correction is appropriate only in rare circumstances, where (1) the error is evident from the face of the patent, and (2) the proposed correction is the sole reasonable interpretation in view of the claim language, specification, and prosecution history. See Group One, Ltd. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 407 F.3d 1297, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) and Novo Indus., L.P. v. Micro Molds Corp., 350 F.3d 1348, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

On March 25, 2024, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., a case with significant implications for the application of the safe harbor provision of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1). This case involved the importation of two transcatheter heart valve systems by Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., an India-based medical device company, to San Francisco for a medical conference. According to Meril, these heart valve systems, part of Meril’s Myval System designed to treat heart disease, were never displayed or offered for sale at the conference but were instead stored in a bag in a hotel closet and later in a storage room. The Court’s decision to affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Meril brings to light the nuances of applying the safe harbor provision in patent infringement cases.