Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 243: HIPAA Compliance and Potential Changes with Shannon Lipham of Maynard Nexsen
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 242: Business Planning in Healthcare & Life Sciences with Jennifer McEwen of Maynard Nexsen
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 241: Fighting Nurse Burnout with Data-Driven Innovation with Dr. Ecoee Rooney of Indicator Sciences
Unexpected Paths to IP Law with Dan Young and Colin White
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 237: Tackling Cancer with Cellular Immunotherapy with Dr. Leonardo Ferreira of Torpedo Bio
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 236: Advocating for Accessible Diagnoses with Sydney Severance of Operation Upright
Taking the Pulse: A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 235: Revolutionizing Cancer Care with Eric Perrault of Kiyatec
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 234: Life-Saving Collaboration in the Life Sciences Industry with John Crowley, President & CEO of BIO
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 28: How Life Sciences Companies Can Create a Culture of Compliance When Expanding to the U.S. Market
How Life Sciences Companies Can Create a Culture of Compliance When Expanding to the U.S. Market
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 233: Prioritizing Women’s Health Through Innovation with Lindsey Calcutt of Incora Health
Taking the Pulse: A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 232: Commercial Real Estate for Life Sciences Companies with Vinnie Durand of Savills
Podcast - Hot Topics in FDA Regulation: GLP-1s, LDTs, AI and More
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 231: Advancing the Life Sciences Industry with Kendalle O’Connell of MassBio
Episode 230: Innovations in Cancer Treatment with Dr. Ray DuBois of MUSC Hollings Center
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 229: Public Health in South Carolina with Dr. Edward Simmer of SC Dept of Public Health
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 228: Designing & Manufacturing Auto-Injectors with Kimberlee Steele of SHL Medical
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 27: U.S. Healthcare Reimbursement Guidance for Foreign Life Sciences Companies
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 227: What’s Next for America’s Life Sciences Industry with Arda Ural of EY
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | SCbio 2025 Preview with President & CEO James Chappell
On May 1, 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of inter partes review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 11,140,841 in the case of Aardevo North America, LLC v. Agventure B.V. The patent in question, owned...more
In a decision that underscores the primacy of prosecution history to determine claim scope, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s interpretation of the transitional phrase...more
AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. SYNTHEGO CORP. - Before Prost, Linn, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Obviousness does not require all claimed limitations to be expressly disclosed in a primary prior...more
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
It is relatively uncommon for parties to submit expert declarations in the preliminary-response phase of an IPR proceeding, but recently the Patent Owner in Imperative Care, Inc. v. Inari Medical, Inc. effectively used that...more
IMMUNOGEN, INC. v. STEWART - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Prost. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. A solution to a problem can be obvious even when the problem itself was unknown in...more
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
After creating something of a frisson due to the apprehension that the Federal Circuit might be convinced to re-evaluate whether it was a necessary element for establishing obviousness for the skilled artisan to have had a...more
Before the USPTO was subject to a hiring freeze, it assumed it would onboard 400 new examiners between fiscal year 2025 and fiscal year 2026, and still predicted an increase in the backlog of unexamined patent applications....more
1. Background: ImmunoGen’s Patent Application & Dispute - In 2014, ImmunoGen, Inc. (Immunogen) filed U.S. Patent Application No. 14/509,809 (the ’809 application)....more
On March 6, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) issued a precedential decision in ImmunoGen, Inc. v. Stewart, in which the court clarified its standards for determining...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed six PTAB decisions that held unpatentable as obvious 79 claims of three Cytiva Bioprocess (“Cytiva”) challenged patents and reversed the PTAB decision upholding four claims....more
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
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has a history of attempting to challenge judicial decisions that the Office, usually for its own policy reasons, takes issue with.[1] Recently, the Office decided to challenge the...more
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
Invega Sustenna® (paliperidone palmitate) - Case Name: Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Civ. Nos. 18-734, 19-16484, 2024 WL 5135666 (D.N.J. Dec. 17, 2024) (Cecchi, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit:...more
On January 6, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) rejecting a challenge to U.S. Patent No. 7,332,277 (“the ‘277...more
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
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
On August 13, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling in Allergan v. MSN Laboratories (Case No. 24-1061). This decision reversed the District of Delaware's application of the Federal Circuit precedent in In re:...more
On August 13, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a welcomed decision to patentees in Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 24-1061 (Fed. Cir. 2024) clarifying the scope of...more
Many life science companies are using AI/ML to identify new disease targets and new therapeutics, predict the efficacy and toxicity of potential clinical therapeutic candidates, design clinical trials and dosing or treatment...more
On May 17, 2024, an Appeals Review Panel (ARP) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) released its decision in Ex parte Chamberlain (referred to in Federal Circuit proceedings as In re Xencor;...more
On May 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that could dramatically impact prosecution practices, especially for those...more
On April 1, 2024 the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., affirming the district court’s finding that certain claims were not indefinite and...more