News & Analysis as of

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter › Prescription Drugs

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a... more +
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a researcher discovers a naturally occurring substance, the substance itself cannot be patented. This issue was examined in a United States Supreme Court case, AMP v. Myriad, in regard to the patentability of human genes.  less -
Robins Kaplan LLP

Horizon Medicines LLC v. Alkem Labs. Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Duexis® (ibuprofen / famotidine) - Case Name: Horizon Medicines LLC v. Alkem Labs. Ltd., No. 18-1014-RGA, 2020 WL 7022591 (D. Del. Nov. 30, 2020) (Andrews, J.) ...more

Fish & Richardson

[Webinar] Life Sciences | 2020 Year in Review - January 27th, 1:30 pm - 2:30 pm ET

Fish & Richardson on

2020 has been referred to as an unprecedented year for the world in so many ways—the pandemic, the California and Washington fires, the racial justice protests and calls to action—but that didn’t stop the Federal Circuit from...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

INO Therapeutics LLC v. Praxair Distribution Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

BUT FOR A CLERICAL ERROR TO BE ADDRESSED ON REMAND, THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT AFFIRMS FINDINGS OF INELIGIBLE SUBJECT MATTER AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. Case Name: INO Therapeutics LLC v. Praxair Distribution Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Personalized Therapy Patent Falls as Patent-Ineligible

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a non-precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit held as patent-ineligible patent claims to personalized therapy to treat patients who would benefit from inhaled nitric oxide treatment and withhold treatment from patients...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Method Withholding Treatment Ineligible For Patenting

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In its non-precedential decision in INO Therapeutics LLC v. Praxair Distribution Inc., the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that method of treatment claims reciting “excluding” specific patients from treatment...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

The Senate Holds Hearings On The State Of Patent Eligibility In America

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Last week the Senate Judiciary Committee held two of three scheduled hearings on “The State of Patent Eligibility in America.” Many witnesses with prominent roles in the patent field testified in favor of legislative action...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Pernix Ir. Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations, Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Pernix Ir. Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations, Ltd., Civ. No. 16-139-WCB, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81419 (D. Del. May 15, 2018) (Bryson, C.J.)....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Finds ANDA Jurisdiction Before PIV Certification

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Our first article on Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Aventisub, LLC focused on the subject matter eligibility of the personalized method of treatment claims under 35 USC § 101. Next, we considered how the Fanapt® label was...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

In an ANDA applicant’s appeal from a bench trial judgment of validity and infringement, the Court affirmed the district court’s judgment on all counts. The case presented unusual procedural circumstances in a Hatch-Waxman...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Cleveland Clinic Decision Highlights Catch-22 Of Personalized Medicine Patents

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Federal Circuit decision in Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostics LLC, strikes another blow against the patent eligibility of diagnostic methods and highlights the difficulty of enforcing personalized...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Actavis Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Actavis Inc., Civ. No. 14-1381-RGA, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127104 (D. Del. Sept. 23, 2015) (Thynge, M.J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Opana ER® (oxymorphone); U.S. Patent No...more

Perkins Coie

Inter Partes Review Proceedings: A Third Anniversary Report

Perkins Coie on

When inter partes review (IPR) proceedings became effective in September 2012, few people would have predicted the transformative effect it would have on patents and the litigation landscape. Three years in, IPR has become...more

Knobbe Martens

Practical Steps for Building a Strong Life Science Patent Portfolio Worth Billions of Dollars

Knobbe Martens on

In the last four years, several companies with antiviral drug programs, including Alios BioPharma, Idenix, Inhibitex, InterMune and Pharmasset, have been acquired by large pharmaceutical companies (‘‘big pharma’’). One of the...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

USPTO Guidance for Examiners Takes Expansive View of Myriad and Prometheus Decisions

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

On March 4, 2014, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a memorandum to the Patent Examining Corps with guidance for determining the patent eligibility of claims relating to products of nature and laws of...more

McDermott Will & Emery

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 7, July 2013

McDermott Will & Emery on

“Reverse Payment” Settlements Face Greater Antitrust Scrutiny Following U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in FTC v. Actavis: Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. - Resolving a split among the U.S. Courts of Appeals, the...more

15 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide