News & Analysis as of

Safe Harbors Patent Invalidity

Goodwin

District Court Grants Summary Judgment and Invalidates Patent in REGENXBIO v. Sarepta Litigation

Goodwin on

On January 5, 2024, in litigation between REGENXBIO and Sarepta Therapeutics, Judge Richard Andrews of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware District Court granted summary judgment for Sarepta and ruled that...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Amgen Inc. v. Hospira, Inc. (D. Del. 2018)

Intent Matters in Safe Harbor under BPCIA - Earlier this week, Judge Richard G. Andrews, U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Delaware decided a veritable plethora of post-trial motions (by both parties) in Amgen...more

McDermott Will & Emery

When a Divisional Is Not a Divisional: No Section 121 Safe Harbor for Reissue Patentee Who Retroactively Omitted New Matter - G.D....

Addressing the “safe harbor” provision under 35 U.S.C. § 121, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court ruling that a reissue patent was invalid for obviousness-type double patenting. G.D....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Strikes Final Blow to Celebrex Patent

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In 2008, the Federal Circuit determined that claims 1-4 and 11-17 of U.S. Patent No. 5,760,068 were invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP) over a related parent patent, in part because the ‘068 patent was filed...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide