W. Earl Touchstone and Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP v. Garrett Gagliano

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the district court “correctly determined” that lan- guage in the ANDA label “would inevitably lead some consumers to practice the claimed method”
• explaining that a court may rely on “uncontested expert testimony to explain how the invention described in the intrinsic record functions” in construing a term to avoid excluding an embodiment disclosed in the specification
• holding circumstantial evidence may suffice to prove specific intent to induce infringement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).