At ACI’s 23rd Advanced Summit on Life Sciences Patents, you can expect informational overviews and thorough discussion of every facet of the industry. In a time of major legislative, regulatory, and judicial change, you can't...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court ruling that a pharmaceutical dosing claim limitation was unpatentable due to obviousness-type double patenting. The court found...more
Attend ACI's 21st Annual Conference on Paragraph IV Disputes and join leaders from brand and generic pharmaceutical companies, renowned outside counsel, esteemed members of the judiciary, government, and academia to: -...more
What You Need to Know: • Instead of filing multiple applications claiming different aspects of an invention but not sharing a single priority chain, patentees should strive to file highly comprehensive applications that...more
1. Background: ImmunoGen’s Patent Application & Dispute - In 2014, ImmunoGen, Inc. (Immunogen) filed U.S. Patent Application No. 14/509,809 (the ’809 application)....more
Under U.S. law, most patents are limited to a term of 20 years from the earliest nonprovisional filing date. However, Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) and Patent Term Extension (PTE) can be used in certain circumstances to gain...more
Unity of invention and double patenting law and practice in Canada can create challenges for patent applicants. For example, applicants may not expect a unity of invention objection to be raised, requiring claims to be...more
In Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 2024-1061 (Fed. Cir. August 13, 2024), the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court of Delaware’s invalidity determination of certain claims of U.S. Patent No....more
The Supreme Court denies Cellect LLC's petition for certiorari to consider whether patent term adjustment ("PTA") should be included in patent term for obviousness-type double patenting ("ODP") purposes....more
In December 2021, patent practice was upended by four related United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions holding that patents subject to statutory Patent Term Adjustment...more
Filing a continuation application from a parent patent is an implicit admission that obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) applies to the resulting continuation patent. A Terminal Disclaimer in the continuation patent over...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness-type double patenting rejection, finding that an unexpected mechanism of action does not render the known use of a known...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit held that obviousness-type double patenting trumps patent term adjustment, opening the door for invalidity attacks that to date had been questionable. In re Cellect was an appeal from a...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...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
Join the conference that the “who’s who” of Hatch-Waxman litigators have designated as the forum which sets the standards for Paragraph IV practice. ACI’s Paragraph IV Litigation Conference is returning LIVE & IN-PERSON to...more
We write to advise you on an issue currently before the Federal Circuit in a case of first impression, namely whether a later-filed, earlier-expiring patent can be used as a reference for obvious-type double patenting (OTDP)...more
Obviousness-type double patenting (“OTDP”) arises when two or more patents or applications include claims that, while not being identical, are not patentably distinct from each other. In the U.S., OTDP rejections can be...more
Double patenting has become a common challenge to patent validity in Canada since the decision rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada in Whirlpool Corp. v Camco Inc in 2000. The Canadian double patenting doctrine is similar...more