News & Analysis as of

Intellectual Property Protection Appeals Life Sciences

Troutman Pepper Locke

Federal Circuit Ruling Broadens Reach of Prosecution History Estoppel to Include Canceled Claims

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Prosecution history estoppel typically arises when a claim is rejected during prosecution and is then amended (narrowed) to overcome the rejection. However, in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC, No....more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands in Long-Pending Dispute over CRISPR IP

Those hoping the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit would finally resolve priority in the long-pending dispute between the University of California and the Broad Institute will have to wait a little longer. Oral...more

MoFo Life Sciences

Federal Circuit Clarifies Patent Term Extension Calculation for Reissue Patents

MoFo Life Sciences on

On March 13, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc., No. 23-2254 (Fed. Cir. 2025) that clarifies how patent term extension (PTE) is calculated for reissue...more

Goodwin

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s In Re Xencor Decision: Jepson Claims Require Written Description for Their...

Goodwin on

On March 13, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Xencor, Inc. (the Xencor decision). The Xencor decision affirms the decision of the Appeals Review Panel...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

McDermott Will & Emery

Inventor’s Motivation to Combine Does Not Control Obviousness

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision rejecting claims of a patent application directed to a dosing regimen for a cancer treatment, finding the claims to be obvious where the...more

Polsinelli

Federal Circuit Refuses to Rehear Case Involving Orange Book Listing of Device Patents

Polsinelli on

Late last year we reported on the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision holding that certain device patents should not have been listed in the FDA’s Orange Book since the claims of the patents in...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Eye-Catching: Biosimilars Injunction Prevails

Addressing a preliminary injunction in patent litigation related to the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s grant of a...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Silvergate Pharms., Inc. v. Bionpharma Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Epaned® (enalapril maleate) - Case Name: Silvergate Pharms., Inc. v. Bionpharma Inc., Civ. Nos. 18-cv-1962, 19-cv-1067, 2024 WL 4417104 (D. Del. Oct. 4, 2024) (Goldberg, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Epaned®...more

A&O Shearman

UPC Court of Appeal confirms strict approach to correcting patent errors by interpretation

A&O Shearman on

Alexion Pharmaceuticals v Amgen (UPC_Coa-405/2024) and Alexion Pharmaceuticals v Samsung Bioepis NL BV (UPC_CoA-402/2024); December 20, 2024. The UPC Court of Appeal has confirmed a strict approach to correcting erroneous...more

McDermott Will & Emery

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

McDermott Will & Emery on

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

Knobbe Martens

Routine Optimization of Result-Effective Variable Can Bridge Gaps in Prior Art

Knobbe Martens on

PFIZER INC. v. SANOFI PASTEUR INC. - Before Lourie, Bryson, and Stark.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more

Smart & Biggar

BYOOVIZ is confusing with BEOVU: Federal Court finds violation of Novartis’ trademark rights

Smart & Biggar on

In a decision dated January 24, 2024, Justice Pallotta allowed Novartis’ application, finding that Biogen and Samsung’s use of the trademark BYOOVIZ in association with an ophthalmologic drug violates Novartis’ rights in its...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit affirms district court finding of no induced or contributory infringement of generic depression drug

A&O Shearman on

In H. Lundbeck A-S v. Lupin Ltd., Case No. 2022-1194 (Fed. Circ. December 7, 2023), Plaintiffs, H. Lundbeck A/S (“Lundbeck”) and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., Takeda Pharmaceuticals...more

Knobbe Martens

Silence Is No Support for Negative Claim Limitation

Knobbe Martens on

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

Knobbe Martens

Is Evidence of Generic Industry Skepticism Enough to Preclude a Finding of a Motivation to Combine?

Knobbe Martens on

AURIS HEALTH, INC., v. INTUITIVE SURGICAL OPERATIONS, INC., Before Dyk, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Summary: Evidence of generic industry skepticism cannot, by itself, form...more

Knobbe Martens

Cancer Drug Patent Not Dead Yet

Knobbe Martens on

(Mar. 31, 2022) Last Friday, ImmunoGen won an appeal at the Federal Circuit in ImmunoGen, Inc. v. Hirshfeld. The lawsuit is a civil action to order the granting of U.S. Application No. 14/509,809 (‘809), titled “Anti-FOLR...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Update on Artificial Intelligence as a Patent Inventor

Our previous blog posts, Artificial Intelligence as the Inventor of Life Sciences Patents? and Update on Artificial Intelligence: Court Rules that AI Cannot Qualify As “Inventor,” discuss recent inventorship issues...more

Knobbe Martens

Written Description: What Is the Proper “Dosage” to Satisfy This Requirement?

Knobbe Martens on

BIOGEN INTERNATIONAL GMBH V. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia. Summary: A specification may not...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

IPR Institution Is Not Permanent, and Is Nonappealable – Part 2

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Biodelivery Sciences Int’l, Inc. v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2019-1643, -1644, -1645 (Fed. Cir., January 13, 2020) - On August 29, 2019, we reported on the Biodelivery decision, where the PTAB received on...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

INO Therapeutics LLC v. Praxair Distribution Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

BUT FOR A CLERICAL ERROR TO BE ADDRESSED ON REMAND, THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT AFFIRMS FINDINGS OF INELIGIBLE SUBJECT MATTER AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. Case Name: INO Therapeutics LLC v. Praxair Distribution Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS...more

Hogan Lovells

Patent Litigation: Dutch Court of Appeal guidance on formal entitlement to priority

Hogan Lovells on

On 30 July, the Court of Appeal of The Hague ruled on the formal entitlement to priority following from a US provisional patent application. The attack on priority in this case is part of a recent trend by parties in patent...more

Smart & Biggar

2019 Mid-Year Highlights in Canadian Life Sciences IP

Smart & Biggar on

Below are the major highlights in Canadian life sciences intellectual property and regulatory law that we have reported on in the first half of 2019....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