Webinar: Orange Book listing sheets under the microscope
Key Considerations for Reshoring U.S. Drug Manufacturing
Drug Pricing Initiatives During the Trump Presidency
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
Patent law in Europe: What pharmaceutical companies need to know
EU excessive pricing laws
Polsinelli Podcast - Generic Drugs to Market - What's the Climate in 2014?
Hosted by ACI, 18th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Conference returns to New York City for another exciting year with curated programming that not only addresses the hot topics, but also puts them within the context of pre-suit...more
Case Name: Genentech, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., Civ. No. 19-78-RGA (D. Del. Mar. 22, 2022) (Andrews, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Esbriet® (pirfenidone); U.S. Patent Nos. 7,566,729 (“the ’729 patent”), 7,635,707...more
ADAPT PHARMA OPERATIONS LTD. V. TEVA PHARMS. USA, INC. Before Newman, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Summary: Recent attempts by competitors to achieve...more
Ranges for Interdependent and Interactive Components Can Be Tricky to Derive - In Modernatx, Inc. v. Arbutus Biopharma Corporation, Appeal No. 20-2329, the Federal Circuit held that a presumption of obviousness based on...more
Case Name: Auxilium Pharms., Inc. v. FCB I LLC, Civ. No. 20-16456, 2021 WL 2802537 (D.N.J. July 6, 2021) (Vazquez, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Testim® (testosterone gel); U.S. Patents Nos. 7,320,968 (“the ’968...more
BECAUSE THE PRIOR ART TAUGHT OVERLAPPING PH RANGES AND STRUCTURALLY SIMILAR COMPOUNDS AS THOSE CLAIMED IN THE PATENT-IN-SUIT, THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT REVERSED SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-OBVIOUSNESS. Case Name: Valeant Pharms...more
BECAUSE A POSA WOULD NOT HAVE SELECTED THE PRIOR-ART COMPOUND AS A “LEAD COMPOUND,” AND THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT THE INVENTION MET AN UNMET NEED AND OVERCAME INDUSTRY SKEPTICISM, DEFENDANT FAILED TO PROVE THAT THE...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
On March 8, 2019, Justice Fothergill granted Valeant Canada’s application for an order prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a notice of compliance to Generic Partners for its generic version of Valeant’s GLUMETZA,...more
When the America Invents Act of 2011 ushered in a number of new administrative procedures for challenging issued patents, the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries at first seemed largely unconcerned. Originally...more
Case Name: Tris Pharma Inc. v. Actavis Labs. Fl, Inc., Fed. Cir. Nos. 2017-2557, -2559, -2560, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32774 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 20, 2018) (Circuit Judges Newman, O’Malley, and Chen presiding; Opinion by Chen, J.)...more
Squib of Holding and Key Implication: The United States Supreme Court, in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., held on January 22, 2019 that "a commercial sale to a third party who is required to keep...more
Case Name: Bayer Intellectual Prop. GmbH v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., No. 15-902, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116931 (D. Del. July 13, 2018) (Stengel, C.J.)....more
Case Name: Galderma Labs., L.P. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, No. 16-207-LPS, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151037 (D. Del. Aug. 27, 2018) (Stark, C.J.)....more
Case Name: Endo Pharms. Sols., Inc. v. Custopharm Inc., 894 F.3d 1374, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 19265 (Fed. Cir. July 13, 2018) (Circuit Judges Moore, Linn, and Chen presiding; Opinion by Chen, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Robinson,...more
In Apotex Inc. v. Novartis AG, IPR2017-00854, Paper 109 (Jul. 11, 2018), the PTAB held that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,187,405 were not unpatentable on three separate grounds. Shortly thereafter, Novartis filed suit...more
Case Name: Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Fed. Cir. Nos. 2015-2021, -2022, -2023, -2024, -2025, -2026, -2028, -2031, -2033, -2034, -2035, -2041, -2042, -2046, -2047, -2049, -2059, -2060, 2016-1025, -1060, -1117,...more
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
In Bayer v. Watson, the panel throws out Bayer’s patent to its Staxyn erectile dysfunction drug as being obvious, noting that the district court focused too heavily on the commercial availability of the prior art. The panel...more
In Merck v. Hospira, the only precedential case decided this week, a majority of the panel affirms a determination of obviousness, noting that despite the objective indicia supporting patentability, the claimed process was...more
MILLENNIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. SANDOZ INC - (Fed. Cir. July 17, 2017) (NEWMAN, Mayer, O’Malley) - This case arose out of an ANDA litigation between Millennium and a number of generic-drug companies who sought FDA...more
On July 17, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed, in a precedential opinion in Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 2015-2066 (Fed. Cir. July 17, 2017), a district court...more
Case Name: Acorda Therapeutics Inc. v. Roxane Labs., Inc., 14-882-LPS, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48479 (D. Del. Mar. 31, 2017) (Stark, J.)....more
Case Name: Genzyme Corp. v. Dr. Reddy’s Labs., Ltd., C.A. No. 13-1506-(GMS), 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62056 (D. Del. May 11, 2016) (Sleet, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Mozobil® (plerixafor solution); U.S. Pat....more
Case Name: Intendis GMBH et al. v. Glenmark Pharms. Inc., USA, 822 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. May 16, 2016) (Circuit Judges Prost, Moore, and Taranto presiding; Opinion by Moore, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Robinson, J.) - Drug...more