New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Inter Partes Review: Validity Before the PTAB
Takeaways: 1. ODP in reexamination and reissue remains unpredictable despite Allergan 2. Patent Owners should carefully review ODP rejections to ensure they are proper Obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) is a legal...more
Last year, the Federal Circuit surprised many observers of patent law in In re Cellect LLC, 81 F.4th 1216, 1228–29 (Fed. Cir. 2023) when—for the first time—it affirmed a U.S. Patent & Trademark Office decision cancelling an...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
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
In August 2023, the Federal Circuit in In re Cellect held that in evaluating unpatentability for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) of a patent that has received patent term adjustment (PTA), the relevant date is the...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
On January 19, 2024, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order denying the Petition for Rehearing En Banc in the much awaited In re Cellect matter. The mandate of the court issued today....more
On January 18, 2024, the USPTO rejected a "contingent" terminal disclaimer filed by Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Acadia) for a patent it owns that is being challenged in a pending litigation as invalid for obviousness-type...more
The Federal Circuit recently clarified the interplay between obvious-type double patenting (ODP) and patent term adjustments (PTA) granted pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 154(b). In In re Cellect, the Federal Circuit explained that...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
In Eli Lilly and Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH, the Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision upholding Teva’s patents directed to specific methods of treatment using an...more
Join the conference that the “who’s who” of Hatch-Waxman litigators have designated as the forum which sets the standards for Paragraph IV practice. ACI’s Paragraph IV Litigation Conference is returning LIVE & IN-PERSON to...more
The Federal Circuit published a precedential decision on September 1, 2021 regarding the unenforceability of a pharmaceutical patent due to inequitable conduct. In Belcher Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Hospira, Inc., the Court...more
Teva Pharms. Int’l GmbH v. Eli Lilly and Co., Appeal Nos. 2020-1747, -1748, -1750 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2021) - Eli Lilly and Co. v. Teva Pharms. Int’l GmbH, Appeal Nos. 2020-1876, -1877, -1878 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2021) - ...more
Perfect Your Patent Prosecution Strategies and Master the Patent Application Process in the U.S and Around the World. ACI’s 18th Global Summit on Life Sciences Patents virtual conference this August will provide practical...more
In a precedential decision delivered this week, the Federal Circuit shot down arguments from Appellants BTG International Limited; Janssen Biotech, Inc.; Janssen Oncology, Inc.; and Janssen Research & Development, LLC (BTG),...more
In Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical Inc., Novartis scored another obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP) win when the Federal Circuit held that a post-URAA child patent could not be cited as an...more
In Novartis AG v. Ezra Ventures LLC, the Federal Circuit addressed “the interplay between a patent term extension (PTE) granted pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 156 and the obviousness-type double patenting doctrine.” In upholding the...more
The United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) has renewed its interest in obviousness, functional claiming and requests for information, especially for biotechnology, chemical and pharmaceutical patents. The USPTO...more
In Impax Laboratories Inc. v. Lannett Holdings Inc., the Federal Circuit upheld the district court decision finding that defendants had failed to establish obviousness of AstraZeneca’s Zomig patents (directed to intranasal...more
In Genzyme Corp. v. Dr. Reddy’s Labs. Ltd., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court decision upholding Genzyme’s Orange Book listed patent for the cancer drug Mozobil® against an obviousness challenge, because the...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed the rejection by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board of claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 6,284,471 as being unpatentable under the doctrine of...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently issued a Final Written Decision in an inter partes review styled Mylan Pharm. v. AstraZeneca AB affirming the patentability of all challenged...more
As of January 2017, the institution rate for Patent Trial and Appeal Board trials involving design patents was 37 percent. That is significantly lower than every other technology area and makes design patents the only...more