News & Analysis as of

Claim Construction Intellectual Property Protection Pharmaceutical Industry

Carlton Fields

Court Finds MSN Does Not Infringe Novartis’s Patent and Clears the Way for Generic Entresto

Carlton Fields on

In In re Entresto (Sacubitril/Valsartan) Patent Litigation, Judge Richard G. Andrews of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware granted MSN Pharmaceuticals Inc. a victory on noninfringement of U.S. Patent No....more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit: Plans for Future Activity Created a Substantial Risk of Future Infringement

Jones Day on

Restem filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,803,176, directed to stem cells obtained from umbilical cord tissue and isolated through a two-step process to create a specific cell marker expression...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Prolia® / Xgeva® (denosumab) / Jubbonti® / Wyost® (denosumab-bbdz) / Ospomyv™ / Xbryk™ (denosumab-dssb) / Stoboclo®...

Venable LLP on

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re: Xencor, Inc.

In re: Xencor, Inc., Appeal No. 2024-1870 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2025) Our case of the week is an appeal from a decision of the Appeals Review Panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, concerning Xencor’s patent application...more

BakerHostetler

A Later-Discovered Improvement to an Invention Cannot Be Used To Reach Back and Invalidate an Earlier-Filed Patent

BakerHostetler on

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

Robins Kaplan LLP

Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Cabometyx® (cabozantinib (L)-malate) - Case Name: Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd., No. 22-228-RGA, 2024 WL 4491176 (D. Del. Oct. 15, 2024) (Andrews, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Cabometyx®...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Melinta Therapeutics, LLC v. Nexus Pharms., Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Minocin® (minocycline) - Case Name: Melinta Therapeutics, LLC v. Nexus Pharms., Inc., Civ. No. 21-2636, 2024 WL 4799896 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 15, 2024) (Kness, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Minocin® (minocycline);...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. MSN Pharms., Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Entresto® (valsartan/sacubitril) - Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. MSN Pharms., Inc., Nos. 2024-2211, 2024-2212, 2024 WL 4969281 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 4, 2024) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Prost, and Reyna presiding; Opinion by...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Highlights the Importance of Separating Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis When Dealing with...

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation v. Torrent Pharma Inc., No. 23-2218 (Fed. Cir. 2025) — On January 10, 2025, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s opinion that claims of a Novartis patent are invalid for lack...more

Smart & Biggar

Canadian patent law 2024: a year in review

Smart & Biggar on

2024 was an active year in Canadian patent law, with the Federal Court issuing several decisions on the merits regarding invalidity and/or infringement. The courts also considered issues of the regulation of patent agents,...more

Knobbe Martens

A Patent Must Describe What Is Claimed, Not What Infringes

Knobbe Martens on

Before Lourie, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patent was not invalid for lack of written description for failing to describe the specific infringing embodiment...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Skilled Artisan’s View Is Decisive in Assessing Asserted Claim Drafting Error

The Court of Appeal (CoA) of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) clarified the legal standard for correcting obvious type inaccuracies in patent claims, explaining that the view of a skilled person at the filing date is decisive...more

DLA Piper

Case-Narrowing Decisions are a One-Way Street: Reviewing Exeltis USA v. Lupin Ltd.

DLA Piper on

Exeltis USA, Inc. and other parties (Exeltis) recently prevailed against Lupin Ltd. and Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Lupin) in a patent infringement suit brought in the District of Delaware. After a three-day bench trial, the...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending September 20, 2024

Alston & Bird on

Vascular Solutions LLC, et al. v. Medtronic, Inc., et al., No. 2024-1398 (Fed. Cir. (D. Minn.) Sept. 16, 2024). Opinion by Mazzant (sitting by designation), joined by Moore and Prost....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Says Extrinsic Evidence Should Have Been Considered in Claim Construction

Knobbe Martens on

In a recent precedential opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated an infringement judgement against Mylan (Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 2022-1889, Fed. Cir. Nov. 6,...more

Knobbe Martens

Niazi’s Patent Survives on Appeal: Federal Circuit Reverses In Part Lower Court’s Decision

Knobbe Martens on

On April 11, 2022, Niazi Licensing Corporation (“Niazi”) succeeded in part in its appeal at the Federal Circuit in Niazi Licensing Corporation v. St. Jude Medical S.C. Inc. Niazi’s lawsuit alleged that St. Jude Medical S.C....more

Knobbe Martens

“Pliable” Language Results in “Resilient” Patent Claims

Knobbe Martens on

NIAZI LICENSING CORPORATION v. ST. JUDE MEDICAL S.C., INC. Before Taranto, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. Summary: Providing examples in the claim language and...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Newsletter - January 2022 (Chinese)

Knobbe Martens on

避而不谈可能支持否定性权利要求限定 - 在 Novartis Pharmaceuticals 诉 Accord Healthcare Inc. 一案(上诉案件编号:21- 1070)中,联邦巡回上诉法院认为,一项对药物“速效剂量”避而不谈的专利申请,为要求不存在此类剂量的否定 性权利要求限制提供了书面说明支持。 ...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Newsletter - January 2022 (Japanese)

Knobbe Martens on

記述がないことがクレームの否定的限定のサポートと解釈できる場合がある Federal Circuit は、Novartis Pharmaceuticals v. Accord Healthcare Inc. (Appeal No. 21-1070) に おいて、薬剤の「初回負荷用量」についての記述がない特許出願は、そのような用量がないことを要 求するクレームの否定的限定に記述によるサポートを提供していることになると判示した。 ...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - January 2022

Knobbe Martens on

January 2022 Federal Circuit Newsletter (Japanese) January 2022 Federal Circuit Newsletter (Chinese)  Silence May Support Negative Claim Limitation In Novartis Pharmaceuticals v. Accord Healthcare Inc. Appeal No. 21-1070, the...more

Knobbe Martens

Intrinsic Evidence Trumps Plain and Ordinary Meaning

Knobbe Martens on

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - January 2020

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Amgen Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, et al., Appeal Nos. 2018-2414, et al. (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2020) - In this appeal from Markman and summary judgment opinions by the district court in a...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

CAFC Affirms PTAB’s Decision That Printed Matter Doctrine Can Be Used In Claim Construction

Troutman Pepper Locke on

In an inter partes review proceeding, a challenger cannot raise patent-eligibility as a ground of invalidity. Rather, the invalidity grounds are limited to lack of novelty and obviousness. ...more

23 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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