Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
The Briefing: A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Podcast: The Briefing - A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Stages of Patent Invalidation Proceedings
On August 13, 2024, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision, authored by Judge Lourie, in Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 24-1061, which limits the...more
On May 10, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released proposed amendments to the rules of practice to add a new requirement for terminal disclaimers filed to prevent non-statutory double patenting....more
Patent owners need to be wary of the pitfalls when attempting to procure follow on patents to an existing technology. It could turn out your own patents could be used against others in the portfolio to render them invalid or...more
On December 4, 2023, the Federal Court issued its public judgment and reasons in two patent infringement actions pursuant to s. 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (“Regulations”) and two patent...more
On August 28, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in In re Cellect, Appeal No. 2022-1293, evaluated for the first time how statutorily authorized patent term adjustments interact with the judge-made...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
A Post-URAA Patent that Issues After but Expires Before a Related Pre-URAA Patent Is Not a Double-Patenting Reference Against the Pre-URAA Patent - In Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical Inc.,...more
In a pair of patent owner victories, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued decisions limiting the applicability of obviousness-type double patenting — known as OTDP — to invalidate or limit the term of...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Moore, Chen, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Obviousness-type double patenting does not invalidate an otherwise validly...more
The Federal Circuit recently decided two appeals, Novartis AG v. Ezra Ventures LLC (“Ezra”) and Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Breckenridge Pharm. Inc. (“Breckenridge”) that both relate to the effect of obviousness-type double...more
D Three Enterprises, LLC v. SunModo Corporation, Appeal Nos. 2017-1909, -1910 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2018) - The Court affirmed a grant of summary judgment of invalidity in favor of patent infringement defendants, based on a...more
Core Wireless Licensing v. LG Electronics, Inc. (No. 2016-2684, 2017-1922, 1/25/18) (Moore, O'Malley, Wallach) - Moore, J. Affirming judgment that patent claims directed to improved display interfaces for electronic...more
Apotex’s Infringement of AstraZeneca’s Omeprazole Formulation Patent Upheld - As previously reported, the Federal Court of Appeal, in a unanimous decision released on January 12, 2017 (2017 FCA 9), has affirmed the...more
In Magna Electronics, Inc. v. TRW Automotive Holdings Corp., No. 1:12-cv-654; 1:13-cv-324 (Dec. 10, 2015), Judge Maloney of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan granted TRW’s motion for partial summary...more
In 2008, the Federal Circuit determined that claims 1-4 and 11-17 of U.S. Patent No. 5,760,068 were invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP) over a related parent patent, in part because the ‘068 patent was filed...more