What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Wolf Greenfield’s New Shareholders
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
Tonia Sayour in the Spotlight
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
Denosumab Challenged Claim Types in Litigation: Claims are counted in each litigation, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple litigations are counted more than once. Within each litigation a claim is counted...more
Case Name: Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Nos. 2022-1147, 2022-1149, 2022-1150, 2022-1151, 2023 WL 2994166 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 19, 2023) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Cunningham, and Stark presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from...more
Case Name: Amgen Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, 2018-2414, 2019-1086, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2020) (Circuit Judges Newman, Lourie, and Taranto presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Goldberg,...more
The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) was passed as part of health reform signed into law by President Obama in March 2010. This year, the BPCIA turns 10. While the U.S. Biosimilars Pathway has...more
THE COURT DENIED DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO ENFORCE ITS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH PLAINTIFF AFTER THE AT-RISK LAUNCH AND SUBSEQUENT SETTLEMENT OF ANOTHER DEFENDANT. Case Name: Amgen Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, No. 16-853-MSG...more
The Court Denied Defendant’s Motion To Enforce Its Settlement Agreement With Plaintiff After The At-risk Launch And Subsequent Settlement Of Another Defendant. ...more
Case Name: Cipla Ltd. v. Amgen Inc., No. 19-44-LPS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74970 (D. Del. May 2, 2019) (Stark, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Sensipar® (cinacalcet HCl); U.S. Patent No. 9,375,405 (“the ’405...more
Case Name: Amgen Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, Civ. No. 16-0853 (MSG), 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125631 (D. Del. July 27, 2018) (Goldberg, J.)....more
Case Name: Amgen Inc. v. Alkem Labs. Ltd., Civ. No. 17-cv-815-GMS, -817-GMS, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208124 (D. Del. Dec. 19, 2017) (Sleet, J.). Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Sensipar® (cinacalcet HCl); U.S. Patent...more
On July 5, 2016, in Amgen v. Apotex (No. 2016-1308), the Federal Circuit again held that a biosimilar applicant must provide its biologic competitor with 180 days’ notice of intent to commercially market a biosimilar product....more
Amgen and Hospira have fired off dueling letters to the court in their litigation over Amgen’s Epogen biosimilar, debating whether the U.S. biosimilar statute, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009...more
Last week in Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc., No. 2016-1308 (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2016), a unanimous Federal Circuit panel ruled that under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), a biosimilar applicant...more
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc., No. 16-1308, provides new guidance on the timeline of biosimilar approval and the impact to commercial marketing. The ruling weighed in on a key...more
Pre-AIA and Post-AIA Issues Presented by the On-Sale Bar - The “on-sale” bar to patentability refers to a sale or offer for sale of an invention that can invalidate the patent for that invention. The...more
In March 2015, the FDA approved the first biosimilar application, which was for a follow-on biologic drug of Amgen’s reference product NEUPOGEN® (filgrastim). Yet, before the applicant, Sandoz, could launch its biosimilar...more
About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Astellas Pharma Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. 1:15-cv-00857; filed September 22, 2015 in the District Court of...more
In Amgen v. Sandoz, Fed. Cir., No. 15-1499 (July 21, 2015), a divided panel of the Federal Circuit issued its first decision interpreting the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), and did so in a manner that...more
In a seriously fractured decision, the Federal Circuit construed the provisions of the Biologics Price Control and Innovation Act (BPCIA or Act) in Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc. In doing so, the court limited the...more