The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., 608 U.S. ___ (2026), is not simply another skinny-label case. For patent litigators, its larger significance is evidentiary. The decision forces a sharper distinction between three concepts that often blur together in induced-infringement cases: knowledge of infringement, commercial benefit from infringement, and affirmative conduct that encourages infringement. Only the third proves i

When litigation is filed outside a lawyer’s home jurisdiction, local counsel is often brought in because the rules require it. Someone admitted in the forum may need to sponsor admission, appear on the pleadings, receive court notices, and help ensure compliance with local procedures. That practical role matters. But local counsel can also provide useful perspective beyond the formal requirements of admission and filing. That practical role has become more important in a liti

The Michigan Supreme Court had a chance to address a question that matters across the automotive supply chain: when does a purchase order, blanket agreement, or long-term supply arrangement create an enforceable requirements contract under Michigan law? But in FCA US LLC v Kamax Inc., ___ Mich App ___ (2025) (Docket No. 371234), appeal dismissed, ___ Mich ___ (Apr. 22, 2026) (Docket No. 168680), the Court did not reach the merits. After the parties settled, the Court vacated

In recent years, inter partes review, or IPR, has been the best-known Patent Office procedure for challenging issued patent claims. Now, recent developments at the USPTO have made ex parte reexamination worth a closer look. Why the renewed interest? The Patent Office has recently changed how it handles discretionary denial issues in IPR and post-grant review proceedings. In 2025, the USPTO announced an interim process that separates discretionary-denial issues from the merits