Legal Opinion
Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided January 9, 2017No. 2016-1544PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALLACH, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Phigenix, Inc. (“Phigenix”) sought inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,337,856 (“the ’856 patent”), alleging that claims 1-8 (“the Asserted Claims”) of the subject patent are unpatentable as obvious over various prior art references. In its final written decision, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) found the Asserted Claims nonobvious. See generally Phigenix, Inc. v. ImmunoGen, Inc., No. IPR2014-00676, 2015 WL 6550500 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 27, 2015).
Phigenix appeals. We possess subject matter jurisdiction…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Spokeo, Inc. v. RobinsSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Lujan v. National Wildlife FederationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Sierra Club v. MortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. CunoSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Real Foods Pty Ltd. v. Frito-Lay North America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018
- E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. v. Synvina C.V.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018
- Jtekt Corporation v. Gkn Automotive Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018
- Rothschild Connected Devices Innovations, LLC v. Guardian Protection Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Avx Corporation v. Presidio Components, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.