Newsletter
| March 11, 2010
Lab. Corp. of Am. Holdings v. Metabolite Labs., Inc.
[T]he mere presence of a patent as relevant evidence to a claim does not by itself present a substantial issue of patent law.
On March 11, 2010, the Federal Circuit transferred Metabolite’s appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit because the Federal Circuit lacked appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a) (1). The district court had granted LabCorp’s motion for summary judgment on its complaint for declaratory judgment that it did not breach a license agreement for failure to pay know-how royalties on homocysteine assays performed after judgment had been entered in a prior patent infringement (involving U.S. Patent No. 4,940,658, which related to detecting deficiencies of vitamin B12 and folate by assaying total homocysteine levels and correlating an elevated level of total homocysteine with a deficiency in either cobalamin or folate) and breach of contract action brought, in part, by Metabolite.
For more information, please contact your Dewey & LeBoeuf relationship partner, or one of the following:
This memorandum is intended only as a general discussion of these issues. It is not considered to be legal advice. We would be pleased to provide additional details or advice about specific situations. For additional information on this important topic, please feel free to call upon your Dewey & LeBoeuf relationship partner. No part of this publication may be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form, without our prior written consent.
For further information on Dewey & LeBoeuf, please visit www.dl.com. +1 888 532 6383