The ABA’s brief, which supports neither party, urges the high court to rule that, in patent cases involving claim construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit must review the factual findings made by a district court under the “clearly erroneous” standard and only conclusions of law under the “de novo” standard. The Federal Circuit now reviews both factual findings and conclusions of law in these cases under the “de novo” standard, which gives no special weight to any determinations made by the district court. The ABA asserts that the Federal Circuit has not properly accounted for the inherent complexity of the factual issues in these cases, and that its standard has resulted in increased uncertainty, inefficiency and expense in patent litigation.
ABA policy underlying the brief was developed by the association’s Section of Intellectual Property Law, whose 25,000 members represent patent owners, accused infringers, individual inventors, large and small corporations, research institutions, and public and private colleges and universities across a wide range of technologies and industries.
The full name of the case is Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Teva Neuroscience, Inc., and Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd. v. Sandoz Inc., Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Mylan Inc., and Natco Pharma Ltd.
With nearly 400,000 members, the American Bar Association is one of the largest voluntary professional membership organizations in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law. To review our privacy statement, click here. Follow the latest ABA news at www.abanow.org and on Twitter @ABANews.