New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Inter Partes Review: Validity Before the PTAB
On August 13, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling in Allergan v. MSN Laboratories (Case No. 24-1061). This decision reversed the District of Delaware's application of the Federal Circuit precedent in In re:...more
On August 13, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a welcomed decision to patentees in Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 24-1061 (Fed. Cir. 2024) clarifying the scope of...more
Many life science companies are using AI/ML to identify new disease targets and new therapeutics, predict the efficacy and toxicity of potential clinical therapeutic candidates, design clinical trials and dosing or treatment...more
On May 17, 2024, an Appeals Review Panel (ARP) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) released its decision in Ex parte Chamberlain (referred to in Federal Circuit proceedings as In re Xencor;...more
On May 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that could dramatically impact prosecution practices, especially for those...more
On April 1, 2024 the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., affirming the district court’s finding that certain claims were not indefinite and...more
We are pleased to share Sheppard Mullin’s inaugural “Year in Review” report that collects and reports on most key patent law-related Federal Circuit decisions for 2023. This is a follow up to the quarterly report we...more
Among the most established standards in patent law is that obviousness requires a motivation to combine the prior art with “a reasonable expectation of success.” The Federal Circuit alone has employed the “reasonable...more
Last week the Federal Circuit handed down a pair of non-precedential decisions affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. This post concerns the decision in Medtronic, Inc....more
Hosted by American Conference Institute, the 22nd Advanced Summit on Life Sciences Patents returns for another exciting year with curated programming that will provide practical insights on how to maximize your patent term...more
An August 2023 decision from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals highlighted potential new fragilities in the patent portfolios of many industry giants, especially those in the pharmaceutical industry....more
In Incept v. Palette Life Sciences 21-2063, 21-2065 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2023), the case addresses the Board’s anticipation and obviousness determinations in two IPRs (IPR2020-00002 and IPR2020-00004), where the Board held the...more
On August 22, 2023, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential decision holding that claims directed to deuterated analogs of ruxolitinib were unpatentable as obvious. Sun Pharm. Indus., Inc. v. Incyte Corp., No....more
Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1461 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 20, 2023) Our Case of the Week focuses on the enablement requirement. It’s the first case to come before the Federal Circuit following the Supreme...more
In its recent review of a district court decision the Federal Circuit characterized as "a thorough opinion," the Federal Circuit affirmed invalidation for obviousness of four claims from four different Orange Book-listed...more
An appellant's burden on appeal is never easy but it is particularly difficult when the questions at issue are based on factual evidence. The appellate judiciary is loathe (generally) to second guess a district court judge...more
Minerva and Hologic, competitors selling devices used for ablating uterine endometrial tissue, are notable for their dispute last year that gave the Supreme Court an opportunity to reassess an established patent law doctrine,...more
Case Name: Bausch Health Ireland Ltd. v. Padagis Israel Pharms. Ltd., No. CV 20-5426 (SRC), 2022 WL 17352334 (D.N.J. Dec. 1, 2022) (Chesler, J.) Drug Products and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Duobrii® (halobetasol...more
Case Name: Takeda Pharm. Co. Ltd. v. Norwich Pharms., Inc., No. 20-8966 (SRC), 2022 WL 17959811 (D.N.J. Dec. 27, 2022) (Chesler, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Vyvanse® (1-lysine-d-amphetamine dimesylate); U.S....more
Case Name: Arius Two, Inc. v. Alvogen PB Rsch. & Dev. LLC, No. 2022-1394, 2022 WL 17828352 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 21, 2022) (Circuit Judges Chen, Clevenger, and Cunningham presiding; Opinion by Chen, J.) (Appeal from D. Del.,...more
Case Name: Salix Pharms., Ltd. v. Norwich Pharms., Inc., C.A. No. 20-cv-430-RGA, 2022 WL 3225381 (D. Del. Aug. 10, 2022) (Andrews, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Xifaxan® (rifaximin); U.S. Patents Nos. 7,612,199...more
The Federal Circuit soon will have the opportunity to decide a question left open during a recent spate of opinions involving the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP): the effect patent...more
ACI’s 8th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Master Symposium returns in person to Chicago on September 21-22! Join leading pharmaceutical patent litigators for brand name and generic drug companies to receive up-to-the-minute...more
ACI’s Advanced Summit on Life Sciences Patents is back in person on June 2–3 in New York City. Our reimagined 2022 conference will provide practical insights on how to implement bullet-proof patent prosecution tactics,...more
Case Name: Adapt Pharma Operations Ltd. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Case No. 2020-2106, 25 F.4th 1354 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2022) (Circuit Judges Newman, Prost, and Stoll presiding; Opinion by Stoll, J.; Dissenting Opinion by...more