News & Analysis as of

Patents Hatch-Waxman Obviousness

Fish & Richardson

The Most Interesting Appellate Cases of 2024

Fish & Richardson on

Appellate courts issued a variety of notable intellectual property (IP) cases in 2024, including cases touching on Orange Book listings, extraterritoriality, willful infringement, design patent obviousness, and public...more

Polsinelli

New PTAB Guidance on Enabling Requirement Under § 102 of the AIA and Construction of Chemical Compound

Polsinelli on

Synopsis: In a recently issued final written decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) found all challenged claims of U.S. Patent No.11,572,334 (“the ’334 patent”) unpatentable.1 The Board’s decision centered...more

Cooley LLP

Precedential Federal Circuit Decision Overturns Lack of Written Description Based on Later-Discovered Technology

Cooley LLP on

On January 10, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Torrent Pharma Inc., reversing a lower court decision that claims of a Novartis patent...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Unexpected Results in Hatch Waxman Litigation: A Review of Legal Decisions from 2023

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Patent owners generally look to secondary indicia to bolster their nonobvious defenses when prior art and/or knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”) seem to make the obviousness decision a close call. This...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Purdue Pharma L.P v. Accord Healthcare Inc. - OxyContin® (oxycodone HCl)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Purdue Pharma L.P v. Accord Healthcare Inc., Civ. No. 22-913-WCB, 2024 WL 4120717 (D. Del. Sept 9, 2024) (Bryson, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: OxyContin® (oxycodone HCl); U.S. Patent No. 11,304,908 (“the...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Provides Clarity On Proper Obviousness-Type Double Patenting References

A&O Shearman on

In Allergan USA, Inc. et al., v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., et al., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision relating to obviousness-type double patenting (“ODP”) and...more

Smart & Biggar

[Webinar] Cross-border IP strategies for IP owners and litigators - September 18th, 2:00 pm PDT

Smart & Biggar on

Explore skinny labelling & obviousness in Canada and Australia - If you are an intellectual property (IP) owner, a litigator or an in-house legal professional managing IP litigation in multiple jurisdictions, don’t miss...more

Smart & Biggar

[Webinar] Cross-border IP strategies for IP owners and litigators - September 12th, 12:00 pm GMT

Smart & Biggar on

Explore skinny labelling & obviousness in Canada and Australia - If you are an intellectual property (IP) owner, a litigator or an in-house legal professional managing IP litigation in multiple jurisdictions, don’t miss...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Vanda Swings for the Fences and Asks the Supreme Court to Heighten the Standard for Obviousness

Among the most established standards in patent law is that obviousness requires a motivation to combine the prior art with “a reasonable expectation of success.” The Federal Circuit alone has employed the “reasonable...more

Fish & Richardson

Middle District of North Carolina Finds Public Interest Favors Granting Preliminary Injunction

Fish & Richardson on

On December 27, 2023, Chief Judge Catherine Eagles of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina granted a motion for preliminary injunction by Natera Inc. enjoining NeoGenomics Laboratories Inc. from...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

In Wake of In re Cellect, District Court Interprets Safe Harbor Statute and Finds Patent Not Invalid for Obviousness-Type Double...

The District Court for the District of Delaware recently held on summary judgment that a patent with 2,295 days of combined patent term adjustment (PTA) and patent term extension (PTE) was not invalid for obviousness-type...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Bausch Health Ireland Ltd. v. Padagis Israel Pharms. Ltd.,

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name:  Bausch Health Ireland Ltd. v. Padagis Israel Pharms. Ltd., No. CV 20-5426 (SRC), 2022 WL 17352334 (D.N.J. Dec. 1, 2022) (Chesler, J.)  Drug Products and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Duobrii® (halobetasol...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Takeda Pharm. Co. Ltd. v. Norwich Pharms., Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Takeda Pharm. Co. Ltd. v. Norwich Pharms., Inc., No. 20-8966 (SRC), 2022 WL 17959811 (D.N.J. Dec. 27, 2022) (Chesler, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Vyvanse® (1-lysine-d-amphetamine dimesylate); U.S....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Arius Two, Inc. v. Alvogen PB Rsch. & Dev. LLC - Belbuca® (Buprenorphine)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Arius Two, Inc. v. Alvogen PB Rsch. & Dev. LLC, No. 2022-1394, 2022 WL 17828352 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 21, 2022) (Circuit Judges Chen, Clevenger, and Cunningham presiding; Opinion by Chen, J.) (Appeal from D. Del.,...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Tris Pharma, Inc. V. Teva Pharms. Usa, Inc., Quillichew Er® (Methylphenidate)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Tris Pharma, Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Civ. No. 20-5212 (KM)(ESK) (D.N.J. Aug. 16, 2022) (McNulty, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: QuilliChew ER® (methylphenidate); U.S. Patents Nos. 9,545,399 (“the...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] Paragraph IV Disputes Master Symposium - September 21st - 22nd, Chicago, IL

ACI’s 8th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Master Symposium returns in person to Chicago on September 21-22! Join leading pharmaceutical patent litigators for brand name and generic drug companies to receive up-to-the-minute...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Discussion of Inventors’ Path in Expert’s Obviousness Opinion Warrants Partial Exclusion in Bench Trial

In the weeks preceding a recent Hatch-Waxman bench trial, a district court excluded portions of an expert’s opinion on obviousness that addressed internal documents and inventor testimony concerning the “inventors’ path” to...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Adapt Pharma Operations Ltd. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. Narcan® (Naloxone)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Adapt Pharma Operations Ltd. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Case No. 2020-2106, 25 F.4th 1354 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 10, 2022) (Circuit Judges Newman, Prost, and Stoll presiding; Opinion by Stoll, J.; Dissenting Opinion by...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 18-cv-734, 2021 WL 5323737 (D.N.J. Nov. 16, 2021) (Cecchi, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Invega Sustenna® (paliperidone palmitate); U.S. Patent No....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

AstraZeneca AB v. Mylan Pharms., Inc.,

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: AstraZeneca AB v. Mylan Pharms., Inc., No. 2021-1729, 2021 WL 5816742 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 8, 2021) (Circuit Judges Taranto, Hughes, and Stoll presiding; Opinion by Stoll, J.; Opinion dissenting in part by Taranto, J.)...more

Haug Partners LLP

No Clear Error to Find Lack of Written Description for a Method of Treatment Patent Despite Separate Disclosures of the Drug,...

Haug Partners LLP on

Biogen International GMBH, Biogen MA, Inc., v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. marks the Federal Circuit’s most recent interpretation of the 35 U.S.C. § 112 written description requirement in the Hatch-Waxman context. No....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Auxilium Pharms., Inc. v. FCB I LLC

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Auxilium Pharms., Inc. v. FCB I LLC, Civ. No. 20-16456, 2021 WL 2802537 (D.N.J. July 6, 2021) (Vazquez, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Testim® (testosterone gel); U.S. Patents Nos. 7,320,968 (“the ’968...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] Paragraph IV Disputes Conference - November 9th - 10th, New York, NY

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

Robins Kaplan LLP

Valeant Pharms Int’l, Inc. v. Mylan Pharms Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

BECAUSE THE PRIOR ART TAUGHT OVERLAPPING PH RANGES AND STRUCTURALLY SIMILAR COMPOUNDS AS THOSE CLAIMED IN THE PATENT-IN-SUIT, THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT REVERSED SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-OBVIOUSNESS. Case Name: Valeant Pharms...more

50 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

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