Late last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court grant of a preliminary injunction based on claim construction involving the effect of two "wherein" clauses in Allergan Sales, LLC v. Sandoz, Inc....more
In Allergan Sales, LLC v. Sandoz, Inc., (Fed. Cir. 2018-2207, Aug. 29, 2019), the Federal Circuit held that “wherein” clauses in a patent claim were limitations because the “wherein” elements were material to patentability....more
In a patent infringement suit related to the generic version of the drug Combigan®, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that claims asserted by Allergan Sales, LLC, were not invalid but not infringed....more
Case Name: Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., Nos. 2016-1085, -1160, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4733 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 17, 2017) (Circuit Judges Reyna, Wallach, and Chen presiding; Opinion by Wallach, J.) (Appeal from M.D.N.C., Eagles,...more
Case Name: Allergan Sales, LLC v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-cv-207-JRG, 15-cv-347-JRG, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135088 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2016) (Gilstrap, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Combigan® (brimonidine...more
Case Name: Allergan, Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., Civ. No. 2014-1275, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13616 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 4, 2015) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Linn, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from E.D. Tex., Schneider,...more
Addressing obviousness issues, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s finding that patents were valid and infringed, despite undeniably including recitations falling within a prior art...more
The Dow Chemical Company v. Nova Chemicals Corporation (No. 2014-1431, -1462, 8/28/15) (Prost, Dyk, Wallach). Dyk, J. Reversing award of supplemental damages. "We hold that the intervening change in the law of...more
In Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court decision that upheld the validity of the Allergan patents relating to Lumigan® 0.01% glaucoma eye drops against obviousness, written...more
In Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court decision that upheld the validity of the Allergan patents relating to Lumigan® 0.01% glaucoma eye drops. This decision shows that it is still...more
About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Sandoz Inc. et al. 1:15-cv-01716; filed March 9, 2015 in the District Court of New...more
In Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., the Federal Circuit upheld the district court decision dismissing Sandoz’s declaratory judgment action for lack of jurisdiction. Although this may be the first Federal Circuit decision relating...more
Biosimilar applicants and branded biologics have been wondering how the procedures set forth in the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”) will be implemented since its enactment in 2010. The lack of...more
Case Name: Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Case No. 11-cv-441, Dkt. No. 136 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 13, 2014) (Schneider, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Lumigan® (bimatoprost); U.S. Patents Nos. 7,851,504 (“the ’504...more
The first court decision interpreting the Biosimilars Act has arrived, with a federal district court in California finding that a biosimilar application must be filed with the FDA before patent litigation can be initiated....more
In This Issue: • Patent Office Must Prove Prior Art Reference Is Enabling • Complaint Was Adequate Despite Non-Infringing Possibilities • FDA Approval Not Relevant to Obviousness Analysis - Excerpt from...more
On May 1, 2013, in Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Dyk, Prost,* O'Malley) affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part the district court's judgment that U.S. Patents No. 7,642,258,...more