ASTRAZENECA AB v. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
Before: Taranto, Hughes, and Stoll -
Summary: For purposes of claim construction, intrinsic evidence can trump the plain and ordinary meaning of scientific conventions such...more
PACIFIC BIOSCIENCES OF CALIFORNIA v. OXFORD NANOPORE TECHNOLOGIES -
Before Lourie, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Enablement is required for...more
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS U.S.A., INC. V. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
Before Prost, Newman, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware -
Summary: The scope of a contract term may...more
8/7/2020
/ Appeals ,
Contract Interpretation ,
Dismissal With Prejudice ,
Generic Drugs ,
IP License ,
Irreparable Harm ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Preliminary Injunctions
VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS INTL. v. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
Before Lourie, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Summary: Prior art ranges for solutions of...more
HOSPIRA, INC. V. FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC -
Before Lourie, Dyk, and Moore. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Summary: Evidence of the properties of claimed embodiments may be...more
1/13/2020
/ Admissible Evidence ,
Appeals ,
Extrinsic Evidence ,
Hospira ,
Inherency ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reaffirmation
NALPROPION PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ACTAVIS LABORATORIES FL, INC.
Before Prost, Lourie and Wallach. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: A “substantially equivalent” disclosure may...more
UCB, INC. v. WATSON LABORATORIES INC.
Before Taranto, Schall, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Application of the doctrine of equivalents may not be barred...more
Before Judges Reyna, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Summary: There may be no reasonable expectation of success in producing a specific polymorph of a compound when...more
On Tuesday, January 22, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that, even where the details of the invention are kept confidential, a commercial sale may place the invention “on sale” under the Leahy-Smith...more
1/24/2019
/ America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Assignment of Inventions ,
Confidentiality Agreements ,
Helsinn Healthcare SA v Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc ,
Inventions ,
On-Sale Bar ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Public Use ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 102 ,
Teva Pharmaceuticals ,
Third-Party Relationships
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Judges Reyna, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Non-prior art evidence may...more
10/17/2018
/ Appeals ,
Evidence ,
Multi-Party Litigation ,
Mylan Pharmaceuticals ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
POSITA ,
Prior Art ,
Reaffirmation ,
Sandoz ,
Teva Pharmaceuticals
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Taranto, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Proceeding to trial despite a party’s violation of a discovery order...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s final written decision holding that claims directed to Novartis’s multiple sclerosis drug Gilenya were obvious in Novartis AG v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals. Ltd., No. 2016-1352 (Fed. Cir....more