Halozyme, Inc. v. Lee, No. 1:2016cv01580 - Document 186 (E.D. Va. 2018)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION re Motion for expenses and motion to stay consideration of personnel expenses. Signed by District Judge Claude M. Hilton on 10/23/18. (klau, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Halozyme, Inc. v. Lee Doc. 186 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division HALOZYME, INC., Plaintiff, Civil Action No. l:16-cv-1580 V. ANDREI lANCU, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant Andrei lancu's. Under Secretary of the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO"), motion for expenses under 35 U.S.C. § 145 and partial motion to stay consideration of personnel expenses. Halozyme brought this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 145, challenging a final decision issued by the USPTC s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the ^'Board") which affirmed the rejections of claims in U.S. application"). The Patent claims Application were 11/238,171 rejected on four ("the ^171 independent grounds: • unpatentable under obviousness-type double pantenting ("GDP") over claims 9 and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 7,767,429 ("the M29 patent") in view of the U.S. Patent No. 5,766,897 ("Braxton") and U.S. Patent No. 6,552,170 ("Thompson"); Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
