Aug. 18 at 11:38 AM
$ABUS
https://www.law360.com/articles/2514311/moderna-arbutus-clash-on-gov-t-venue-for-vax-ip-claims
Based on the current record I would regard Arbutus as having the stronger position on the core §1498 issue...Delaware district court already rejected most of M’s §1498 defense.
M is now appealing that specific issue to the Fed Circuit.
...Judge Wolson's February 2, 2026 decision was quite damaging to M.
He found that the overwhelming majority of the doses went to the general public,not to the Government itself. Gov paid for them,but payment isn't necessarily the same thing as the patented invention being used “for the Government": He specifically relied on the older Larson principle: medical treatment is provided for the patient,rather than for the government merely because the Gov funds it.
That's the heart of ABUS's argument.
DC essentially split the vaccines into 2 categories:
1. Vaccines distributed to the general public
→ §1498 does not shield M.
2. Vaccines the Gov acquired+distributed directly to its own employees
→ §1498 does apply to direct infringement.
