Federal Circuit· 1/9/2017

Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc.

Citations

845 F.3d 1168
121 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1242
2017 WL 74762
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 323

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that a petitioner for inter partes review before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board lacked Ar- ticle III standing before this court, notwithstanding the pe- titioner’s statutory right to appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 319
noting that appel- lant “does not contend that it faces risk of infringing the [challenged] patent, that it is an actual or prospective li- censee of the patent, or that it otherwise plans to take any action that would implicate the patent”
stating that the injury must be real or imminent
adopting the summary judgment burden of production in cases challeng- ing final agency action
finding lack of standing where opposing declaration 18 failed to comply with Rule 56
it suffices under Ar- ticle III if the challenger is “an actual or prospective licen- see of the patent . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dyk, Wallach, Hughes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

34 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.