What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
(Podcast) The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Art of Teaching Complex Technology in Patent Litigation - IMS Insights Podcast Episode 67
The Briefing: Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
Podcast: The Briefing - Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
5 Key Takeaways | How to Effectively Leverage the Chinese Patent System
Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
Donation (Disclosure-Dedication) Doctrine in China’s Patent Litigation
6 Key Takeaways | Patent Opinions – New Developments and Pitfalls
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Kidon IP War Stories: David Cohen & Daryl Lim
Protecting the PB&J – Preserving IP Rights from Concept to Market
Patent Marking in China
Webinar: Orange Book listing sheets under the microscope
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
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
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
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - TEVA BRANDED PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS R&D, INC. v. AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS OF NEW YORK, LLC [OPINION] (2024-1936, 12/20/2024) (Prost, Taranto, Hughes) - Prost, J. The...more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. MSN Pharms. Inc., Civ. No. 20-MD-2930-RGA, 2024 WL 3756787 (D. Del. Aug. 12, 2024)....more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Hetero USA Inc., Civ. No. 20-md-2930-RGA, 2024 WL 3757086 (D. Del. Aug. 12, 2024)....more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Becerra, No. 24-CV-02234 (DLF), 2024 WL 3823270 (D.D.C. Aug. 13, 2024) (Friedrich, J.)....more
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
Patent claim limitations that are “negative”—that is, claim limitations specifying the absence of a particular element from the patent claim—can pose a dilemma in the written description context. How much of the specification...more
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
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
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
NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS v. ACCORD HEALTHCARE INC. Before Moore, Linn, and O’Malley. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patent application that was silent about a...more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Accord Healthcare Inc., No. 18-1043-KAJ (D. Del. August 10, 2020) (Jordan, J.)... Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Gilenya® (fingolimod); U.S. Patent No. 9,187,405 (“the ’405...more
Case Name: Piramal Healthcare US Ltd. v. Novartis Pharms. Corp., No. 19-12651 (SRC), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38849 (D.N.J. Mar. 5, 2020) (Chesler, J.)....more
CAR T-Cell therapy, a new biologic therapy, is taking off. As companies continue to develop this new and promising therapy, patent litigation inevitably follows. ...more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Accord Healthcare Inc., C.A. No. 18-1043-LPS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104969 (D. Del. June 24, 2019) (Stark, J.)....more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Accord Healthcare Inc., C.A. No. 18-1043-LPS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101106 (D. Del. June 17, 2019) (Stark, J.)....more
Case Name: Novartis Pharma Co. v. West-Ward Pharms. Int’l, No. 2018-1434, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 14122 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2019) (Circuit Judges Stoll, Plager, and Clevenger presiding; Opinion by Stoll, J.) (Appeal from D. Del.,...more
Case Name: Novartis AG v. Ezra Ventures LLC, Fed. Cir. No. 2017-2284, 2018 U.S App. LEXIS 34459 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 7, 2018) (Circuit Judges Moore, Chen, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Chen, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Stark,...more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp v. Breckenridge Pharm. Inc., No. 2017-2173, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 34462 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 7, 2018) (Circuit Judges Prost, Wallach, and Chen; Opinion by Chen, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Andrews,...more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. West-Ward Pharms. Int’l Ltd., 15-cv-474-RGA, 2017 U.S. Dist. Lexis 205600 (D. Del. Dec. 14, 2017) (Andrews, J.)....more
Led by partner Natalia Gulyaeva, the Hogan Lovells Moscow team represented Novartis in a precedent case for pharma business proving that one can obtain an injunction using patent rights against a generic in Russia before the...more
Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Breckenridge Pharm., Inc., Civ. Nos. 14-1043-RGA, 14-1196-RGA, 14-1289-RGA, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46595 (D. Del. Mar. 28, 2017) (Andrews, J.)....more
Earlier this summer, in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the District Court for the Northern District of California granting summary judgment of invalidity of the asserted...more