IS THE A IN ANDA BEGINNING TO MEAN ANTITRUST?
The Medicines Company (“MedCo”) appealed findings of no infringement made by the United District Court for the District of Delaware. Hospira cross-appealed the district court’s finding that a distribution agreement did not...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Dyk, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A distribution agreement qualifies as an invalidating “offer for sale”...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and found that a Supply and Purchase Agreement between Helsinn and third-party MGI Pharma, Inc. (MGI) before the critical date of the asserted...more
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently construed the on-sale bar provision of 35 U.S.C. 102(a) in a way that will make it easier for petitioners to challenge third party patents. While in an inter-partes...more
Last week the Federal Circuit in Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals clarified the scope of the on-sale bar rule under the America Invents Act (AIA). The on-sale bar in general means that a sale or an offer to sale of...more
On May 1st, the Federal Circuit ruled that the America Invents Act (AIA) did not change the statutory meaning of “on sale” where the existence of a sale was publicly announced prior to patenting, even if the sale did not...more
Yesterday, the Federal Circuit provided much-anticipated guidance on the scope of the America Invents Act’s “on-sale” bar provision. Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al., Nos. 2016-1284, 2016-1787...more
Helsinn v. Teva (Fed. Cir. 2017) - On May 1, 2017, a Federal Circuit panel ruled that the AIA did not change the statutory meaning of “on sale” and that the on-sale bar can be triggered by a sale whose existence is...more
On-Sale Bar Is No Bar for Selling Manufacturing Services to the Inventor - Addressing what constitutes an invalidating “sale” under § 102(b), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sitting en banc affirmed the...more
Pharmaceutical and biotech companies breathed a sigh of relief Monday when the Federal Circuit unanimously ruled in a precedential opinion that the mere sale of manufacturing services to create embodiments of a patented...more
The court’s decision provides insight into which activities trigger the on-sale bar provision. On July 11, in The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., No. 14-1469 (Fed. Cir. July 11, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...more
If you were concerned that outsourcing the manufacture of your invention before you filed your patent application triggered a "sale" that could put your patent at risk, you can rest easy. In The Medicines Company v....more
The past decade or so of U.S. patent law has been characterized by a consistent theme between Federal Circuit decisions and the Supreme Court's invalidation of them (and sometimes can be discerned even in those rare instances...more
Addressing the minimum requirements for raising an on-sale bar defense to patent infringement, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court, explaining that “[a]n offer to sell is sufficient to...more
Sleet, J. Post-trial opinion issues with respect to four patents-in-suit in ANDA trial relating to Bendamustine. Trial took place December 1 through 8, 2015....more
Ruckus Wireless, Inc. v. Innovative Wireless Solutions (No. 2015-1425, 1438, 5/31/16) (Prost, Reyna, Stark) - May 31, 2016 3:11 PM - Reyna, J. Affirming summary judgment of non-infringement of patents based on...more
In Merck & CIE v. Watson Laboratories, Inc., the Federal Circuit found communications between Merck and a potential joint venture partner amounted to a commercial offer to sell that invalidated the Orange Book-listed folate...more
There have been many voices raised in recent years against the patent system for a variety of political, policy, or personal reasons. Indeed, there is even a book entitled Don't File a Patent that sets out the authors'...more
In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a transaction with a contract manufacturer gave rise to an on sale bar that invalidated The Medicines Company’s Angiomax® patents. Are the facts of this...more