On June 4, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court's decision granting noninfringement to Moderna, Inc. in its patent dispute with Alnylam Pharmaceuticals relating to mRNA vaccine technology. The CAFC concluded that Alnylam had defined 'branched alkyl' in its patents in a way that was detrimental to its infringement claims. This decision reinforces that express definitions provided by patentees take precedence unless they indicate otherwise, impacting future patent interpretations in similar legal contexts.
The CAFC emphasized that once a patentee includes an express definition, it governs the claim term unless a clear exception is explicitly provided.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's ruling of noninfringement in the patent battle between Moderna and Alnylam.
Alnylam defined its patent term 'branched alkyl' specifically, which the CAFC ruled is binding unless a clear exception is articulated.
Moderna's SMT-102 was held not to infringe Alnylam's patents because it did not meet the defined criteria of 'branched alkyl'.
Collection
[
|
...
]