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
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
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
NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORP. V. HEC PHARM CO., LTD. Before Moore, Hughes, and Linn (dissenting). Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Silence regarding the presence or...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
Addressing issues of motivation to combine and whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is bound by district court decisions of obviousness, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the PTAB is not...more
In Novartis AG v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidating all claims of U.S. Patent 8,324,283, which is one of four Orange...more
As we have previously discussed on this blog, when considering an issue of patentability such as definiteness under section 112, the PTAB and a district court may properly reach opposite conclusions. In Tinnus Enterprises LLC...more
The US Circuit Court for the Federal Circuit issued an important decision last week regarding the interplay of court litigation and inter partes reviews (IPRs) at the US Patent and Trademark Appeals Board (PTAB) on the issue...more
About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Horizon Therapeutics, Inc. v. Lupin Ltd. et al. 1:16-cv-04438; filed July 21, 2016 in the District Court of New Jersey -...more
About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Ventana Medical Systems, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. 3:16-cv-02703; filed May 18, 2016 in the Northern District of California. ...more