5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Verdict in T-Cell Immunotherapy IP Case Tests 'Reasonable Royalty' Concept for Large Damage Awards
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently invalidated a University of Massachusetts (“UMass”) patent related to the treatment of the skin disease vitiligo in a post-grant review. (See Forte Biosciences Inc v....more
We are excited to announce Venable’s inaugural Life Sciences Webinar Series. This month-long series will explore the intricacies and latest developments that shape the life sciences industry. Join us as we hear from our...more
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has affirmed the lower court’s ruling that Amgen’s broad genus claims to cholesterol-lowering antibodies are invalid for lack of enablement....more
Biologics have become the fastest-growing class of therapeutic compounds. They have provided innovative treatment alternatives for people who suffer from some of the most serious medical conditions known to man. The...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi (referred to as the Amgen decision) likely makes it more difficult for life sciences companies to obtain broad patents claiming an entire genus of antibodies...more
Hosted by C5, the 16th Annual Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe returns 23-24 May, at the DoubleTree by Hilton Amsterdam Central Station, Amsterdam with curated programing for you to gain the knowledge and...more
The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in Amgen, Inc. v. Sanofi (No. 21-757) on Monday, March 27, 2023. The highly contentious question before the high court focuses what an applicant must show to meet the enablement...more
The Supreme Court's (re)consideration of the enablement requirement expected in its decision later this year in Amgen v. Sanofi may be the most closely watched patent case since AMP v. Myriad Genetics. But in a decision...more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., No. 2021-1070, 2022 WL 2204163 (Fed. Cir. June 21, 2022) (Circuit Judges Moore, Linn, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Moore, J.; Dissenting Opinion by Linn, J.)...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
On June 21, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”), in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., granted petition for panel rehearing, vacated its prior decision, and reversed the...more
The Federal Circuit recently granted a panel rehearing and vacated a panel decision between these parties decided earlier this year (see Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare), and rendered a decision that...more
On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party),...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: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., No. 2021-1070, 2022 WL 16759 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 3, 2022) (Circuit Judges Moore, Linn, and O’Malley presiding; Opinion by O’Malley, J.; Dissenting Opinion by Moore,...more
On March 16, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Biogen International GmbH and Biogen MA, Inc.’s (“Biogen”) combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in Biogen International GmbH v....more
On March 16, 2022, the Federal Circuit denied Biogen’s petition for rehearing of its November 2021 decision in Biogen Int’l GmbH v. Mylan Pharms., Inc., 18 F.4th 1333, 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2021), which found that Biogen’s patent...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a patent owner’s request for en banc rehearing of a panel decision that invalidated a patent for lack of written description on the basis that a person of skill in the...more
Premier forum which shapes the law, policy, and proceedings of Paragraph IV Litigation is back to New York City on April 26-27! Pharmaceutical patent practitioners from across the globe attend this flagship conference to...more
On March 16, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Biogen’s petition for en banc review in Biogen International GmbH et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. ("Petition Denial"), in which a Federal Circuit...more
On March 16th, the Federal Circuit denied Biogen's petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in Biogen Int'l GmbH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. Judges Cunningham and Stoll did not participate in the decision, which...more
Over the last 20-plus years, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit cases concerning written description and enablement have become a hot-button issue in the chemical and life sciences practices. The year 2021 was no...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
On January 3, 2021, The Federal Circuit held in a 2-1 decision in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022) that the claims of Novartis’ U.S. Pat. No. 9,187,405 (“the ’405 patent”) met the...more
In an appeal, Novartis Pharmaceuticals v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., the issue of whether a patent provides sufficient written description of a negative limitation split the panel at the Federal Circuit. Novartis...more