A Substantial Question is All That is Needed to Defeat a Preliminary Injunction

Novo Nordisk A/S, v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC [2008-1225] (July 30, 2008) [PROST, Lourie, Bryson] NON-PRECEDENTIAL The Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,241,278.
DISCUSSION: The district court denied the preliminary injunction because Novo failed to show a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits. More specifically the district court found that Novo has not shown that Sanofi’s asserted defense that SoloStar does not infringe the ’278 patent lacks substantial merit.The Federal Circuit said that after reviewing the intrinsic record, it could not conclude that the district court abused its discretion. The Federal Circuit said that in light of apparent conflict between the specification and the claims, the district court appropriately exercised its discretion in concluding that Novo has not established a likelihood of success on the merits. The Federal Circuit read the district court’s opinion as generally addressing whether Sanofi raised “substantial questions,” rather than specifically articulating a claim construction. The Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction.