Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz

For years, the Federal Circuit was divided over the proper standard of review for claim construction, with precedent providing that review of subsidiary fact-findings is de novo even as several circuit judges objected. In this precedent-setting case, Goodwin attorneys successfully persuaded the Supreme Court to review the standard of review for claim construction and to reverse the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court agreed with Goodwin attorneys’ arguments that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) applies to claim construction rulings, and that subsidiary findings of fact that inform a claim construction decision are review for clear error only.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz Cert. Petition

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz Cert Reply Brief for Petitioners

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz Petitioners’ Merits Brief

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz Petitioners’ Merits Reply Brief

Download PDF

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *