News & Analysis as of

Life Sciences Prior Art Pharmaceutical Industry

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit clarifies presumption of obviousness for overlapping ranges

A&O Shearman on

After the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s non-obviousness determination, the district court again found that Teva failed to show, by clear and convincing evidence, that the claims of Janssen’s patent...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Prosecution history primacy: “Consisting essentially of” means what applicant said it meant

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

MoFo Life Sciences

What Makes a Good Cell and Gene Therapy Application?

MoFo Life Sciences on

Cell and gene therapies represent a transformative frontier in modern medicine, offering potential cures for previously untreatable conditions. However, securing intellectual property (IP) protection for these innovations...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

DLA Piper

What is a “Clear and Unmistakable” Prosecution History Disclaimer?

DLA Piper on

The Federal Circuit’s March 21, 2025 decision in Maquet Cardiovascular LLC v. Abiomed Inc. et al. (No. 2023-2045) and the recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Delegated Rehearing Panel decision in SynAffix B.V. v....more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Herceptin® (trastuzumab) / Ogivri® (trastuzumab-dkst) / Herzuma® (trastuzumab-pkrb) / Ontruzant® (trastuzumab-dttb)...

Venable LLP on

Trastuzumab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

DLA Piper

Federal Circuit Refines Obviousness Framework for Drug and Biologic Dosing Regimens

DLA Piper on

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court ruling that a pharmaceutical dosing claim limitation was unpatentable due to obviousness-type double patenting. The court found...more

BakerHostetler

Life Sciences Newsletter - March 2025

BakerHostetler on

Welcome to the first issue of the BakerHostetler Life Sciences Newsletter! Within it you will find an overview of noteworthy developments in the life sciences space and at BakerHostetler. ...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] 21st Annual Conference on Paragraph IV Disputes - April 29th - 30th, New York, NY

Attend ACI's 21st Annual Conference on Paragraph IV Disputes and join leaders from brand and generic pharmaceutical companies, renowned outside counsel, esteemed members of the judiciary, government, and academia to: -...more

Knobbe Martens

An Obvious Solution to an Unknown Problem?

Knobbe Martens on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Patent Strategy: Securing Patent Protection for New Use of Old Drugs

Foley & Lardner LLP on

GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) were initially approved for diabetes treatment (e.g., Ozempic®) but have revolutionized weight management (e.g., Wegovy®) and are now being explored for treating a wide range of health...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

Robins Kaplan LLP

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

Robins Kaplan LLP on

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

Goodwin

Eight on AI: Quick Considerations on Patenting Drug Discovery Therapeutics using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Life...

Goodwin on

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

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Medtronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Life Sciences Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

Last week the Federal Circuit handed down a pair of non-precedential decisions affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings.  This post concerns the decision in Medtronic, Inc....more

A&O Shearman

When is the composition of a product on the market prior art?

A&O Shearman on

G1/23 – EPO Enlarged Board of Appeals of the EPO “available” (referral from T 0438/19) - Under which circumstances can the public prior use of a product constitute prior art for novelty or inventive step[s], specifically...more

Irwin IP LLP

CAFC Holds Priority Favors True Trailblazers, Not Maze-Like Paths Through a Forest of Prior Applications: Regents of the...

Irwin IP LLP on

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) recently upheld a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) that found some claims of U.S. Patent 8,815,830 (“the ’830 patent”) unpatentable as anticipated....more

A&O Shearman

PTAB Decision Invalidating Claims Finding Lack of Written Description and Later Priority Date Upheld by Federal Circuit

A&O Shearman on

Procedural History - Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., Case No. 2021-2168 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 6, 2023) is an appeal by the Regents of the University of Minnesota (“Minnesota”) from a final...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

Genentech, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Genentech, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., Civ. No. 19-78-RGA (D. Del. Mar. 22, 2022) (Andrews, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Esbriet® (pirfenidone); U.S. Patent Nos. 7,566,729 (“the ’729 patent”), 7,635,707...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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Adapt Pharma Operations Ltd. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

In a crowded pharmaceutical art, the deficiencies thereof being so patent that the FDA encouraged industry to address and correct them, concerning a formulation developed to address the opioid crisis raging earlier in this...more

Knobbe Martens

Ranges for Interdependent and Interactive Components Can Be Tricky to Derive

Knobbe Martens on

MODERNATX, INC. v. ARBUTUS BIOPHARMA CORPORATION - Before Lourie, O’Malley and Stoll.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A presumption of obviousness based on overlapping ranges requires showing...more

34 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