News & Analysis as of

Generic Drugs Patents Claim Construction

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Enbrel® (etanercept) / Erelzi® (etanercept-szzs) / Eticovo® (etanercept-ykro) - May 2025

Venable LLP on

Etanercept Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Rituxan® (rituximab) / Truxima® (rituximab-abbs) / Ruxience® (rituximab-pvvr) / Riabni™ (rituximab-arrx) - May 2025

Venable LLP on

Rituximab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Knobbe Martens

Hard to Stomach: Things You Say to Prosecute a Patent Can and Will Be Used Against You

Knobbe Martens on

AZURITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD. Before Murphy, Moore, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Arguments and amendments made during prosecution of a parent...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Prosecution Disclaimer Alive and Well, Especially in Closed Claim

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s noninfringement determination, finding that the presence of a disclaimed compound in the accused product precluded infringement. Azurity Pharm., Inc....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd.

Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., Appeal No. 2023-1977 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 8, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed that defendant Alkem’s proposed generic antibiotic did not...more

Irwin IP LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Loophole Allowing Patents To Cover Later Developed Technologies

Irwin IP LLP on

In re Entresto, 125 F.4th 1090 (Fed. Cir. 2025) - After Novartis’ patent on the blockbuster blood pressure medication Entresto was found invalid at the district court for covering technology that was developed after the...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Actavis Labs. FL, Inc. v. United States

Actavis Labs. FL, Inc. v. United States, Appeal No. 2023-1320 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 21, 2025) Our Case of the Week, in the words of its author, Circuit Judge Stark, “is not actually a patent case. It is, instead, a tax case.” In...more

BakerHostetler

A Later-Discovered Improvement to an Invention Cannot Be Used To Reach Back and Invalidate an Earlier-Filed Patent

BakerHostetler on

Novartis markets and sells a combination therapy of valsartan and sacubitril under the brand name Entresto® for the treatment of various forms of heart failure. MSN submitted an Abbreviated New Drug Application seeking...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: Written Description and Enablement Depend on What a Patent 'Claims,' Not What the Claims Cover

The Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court decision that found a patent that did not describe after-arising technology failed to satisfy the written description requirement. In so doing, the Federal Circuit...more

Lathrop GPM

Federal Circuit Upholds Validity of Entresto Patent In Precedential Decision Concerning Written Description and Enablement

Lathrop GPM on

In a Jan. 10 precedential ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the validity of the U.S. patent covering Novartis’s blockbuster drug Entresto was upheld, reversing an earlier decision by the...more

DLA Piper

Case-Narrowing Decisions are a One-Way Street: Reviewing Exeltis USA v. Lupin Ltd.

DLA Piper on

Exeltis USA, Inc. and other parties (Exeltis) recently prevailed against Lupin Ltd. and Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Lupin) in a patent infringement suit brought in the District of Delaware. After a three-day bench trial, the...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending September 20, 2024

Alston & Bird on

Vascular Solutions LLC, et al. v. Medtronic, Inc., et al., No. 2024-1398 (Fed. Cir. (D. Minn.) Sept. 16, 2024). Opinion by Mazzant (sitting by designation), joined by Moore and Prost....more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

"About" Patent Claim Construction: Par v. Hospira

The use of the word “about” in a patent claim as part of a numeric range might permit the patent holder to preclude competitor formulations falling outside the approximate range, as illustrated in a fairly recent decision Par...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Hospira, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

It has long been understood that claim construction can, and frequently is, dispositive in patent litigation.  This truism was the basis for the Federal Circuit affirming the District Court's decision against a generic drug...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - November 2020 #2

Valeant Pharmaceuticals North America LLC v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal No. 2019-2402 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 5, 2020) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed a lingering question about venue following the...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - September 2020

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - ANTENNASYS, INC. v. AQYR TECHNOLOGIES, INC. [OPINION] (O’Malley, Bryson, Reyna) - O’Malley, J. Remanding to district court to address threshold issues of whether case should be...more

Knobbe Martens

The Definition of “Half-Liquid” Is Only Half Baked

Knobbe Martens on

IBSA INSTITUT BIOCHIMIQUE, S.A. V. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware - Summary: A term may be indefinite when the proposed construction is not...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Definiteness, Drug Labels and Diclofenac, Oh My

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s invalidity and infringement judgments for patents directed to a topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, finding that a patent claim reciting a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

When Is “Wherein” Clause Limiting? When It’s Material to Patentability

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding, based largely on the prosecution history, that disputed “wherein” clauses were limiting and therefore the grant of a preliminary injunction...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Clear Disavowal in Specification Can’t Be Remedied by Non-Material Change in Claims

Addressing an appeal from four related actions concerning Orange Book patents covering Suboxone® sublingual film, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgments that certain generic...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Statements of Efficacy and Safety Material Claim Limitations

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - May 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Priority Claims Cannot Be Incorporated by Reference - In Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals International Limited, Appeal Nos. 2016-2707 and 2016-2708, the Federal Circuit held that when a patent for a...more

Knobbe Martens

Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co. v. Emcure Pharmaceuticals

Knobbe Martens on

Before Moore, Mayer, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Summary: Plain claim language will not be narrowed based on a patent’s specification unless the patentee clearly...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - March 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Distribution Agreements Can Constitute Offers for Sale Under Section 102(b) - In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2014-1469, 2014-1504, the Federal Circuit held that a distribution agreement qualified as...more

Holland & Knight LLP

New Reverse-Payment Decision Sheds Further Light on Plaintiffs’ Causation Burden

Holland & Knight LLP on

As post-Actavis antitrust litigation over so-called “reverse payment” patent settlements proceeds, courts continue to provide further illumination about what evidence a private plaintiff would need to offer to survive summary...more

31 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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