News & Analysis as of

Pharmaceutical Industry Patents Patent Litigation

Haug Partners LLP

Swiss Court Signals More Lenient Approach to AI Inventions

Haug Partners LLP on

On June 26, 2025, the Swiss Federal Administrative Court (“Court”) issued its decision in case B-2532/2024, resolving a high-profile dispute over whether an artificial intelligence (“AI”) system can be named as an inventor...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation USA - October 14th - 15th, New York, NY

Attend ACI's inaugural Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation USA and garner a winning edge in the high- stakes life sciences patent ligation arena. Get the in-depth and practical information that you need to develop...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Virtual Conference] Passport to Proficiency on the Essentials of Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA - October 14th - 30th, 1:00 pm EST

ACI’s virtual Annual Passport to Proficiency on the Essentials of Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA equips early-career professionals with the legal and regulatory fluency needed to contribute meaningfully to product strategy and...more

Goodwin

UK Court of Appeal Upholds Moderna mRNA Patent Against Pfizer/BioNTech

Goodwin on

On August 1, 2025, a UK Court of Appeal upheld the validity of Moderna’s European Patent No. 3,590,949 (“EP’949”) in a dispute with Pfizer and BioNTech. The decision affirmed a July 2024 UK High Court ruling finding that...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Biosimilar Litigations - August 2025

Venable LLP on

Biosimilar Litigations include litigations relating to biosimilar/follow-on products of CDER-listed reference products. Litigations between biosimilar applicants/manufacturers and reference product sponsors as well as...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Liquidia Techs., Inc. v. FDA - Updated 5.2.25

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: FDA refused to approve Liquidia’s drug product, Yutrepia because another company, UTC, maintained marketing exclusivity. Liquidia sued FDA, and UTC intervened. The court granted...more

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

Womble Bond Dickinson

Reminder: “Consisting essentially of” Is U.S. Patent Claim Language Needing Interpretation

Womble Bond Dickinson on

On June 30, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Eye Therapies v. Slayback Pharma in which the court interpreted the transition phrase “consisting essentially of” to be a closed term excluding other...more

Venable LLP

Amgen and Accord Settle Prolia® / Xgeva® BPCIA Litigation over INTP23

Venable LLP on

On July 16, 2025, Amgen and Accord settled Case No. 1:25-cv-01305 (D.N.J.) / MDL 1:25-md-03138 (D.N.J.) alleging infringement of 34 of Amgen’s patents by Accord’s proposed Prolia® / Xgeva® (denosumab) biosimilar INTP23...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Jazz Pharms., Inc. v. Avadel CNS Pharms., LLC

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Jazz Pharms., Inc. v. Avadel CNS Pharms., LLC, Nos. 2024-2274, 2024-2277, 2024-2278, 2025 WL 1298920 (Fed. Cir. May 6, 2025) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Reyna, and Taranto presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from...more

A&O Shearman

UPC Court of Appeal clarifies approach to claim construction

A&O Shearman on

Insulet v EOFlow UPC_CoA_768/2024 (Ord_69078/2024) The Unified Patent Court (UPC) Court of Appeal has issued a significant decision that provides important guidance on the interpretation of patent claims in UPC...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

District Circuit Denies Novartis’s Request for Injunctive Relief Against MSN’s Generic Version of Entresto®

The District Court for the District of Delaware recently rejected Novartis’s effort to block MSN Pharmaceuticals from launching a generic version of Entresto® (sacubitril/valsartan), its top-selling heart failure medication....more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending July 11, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Egenera, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 2023-1428 (Fed. Cir. (D. Mass.) July 7, 2025). Opinion by Stark, joined by Prost and Taranto. Egenera owns a patent related to improved systems and methods for deploying and...more

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

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Is Your Enantiomer Possessed? Patenting of Enantiomers – Does Written Description Require More Than Actual Possession?

It is well established that an enantiomerically pure compound exhibiting advantageous properties not present in its isomer or its corresponding racemic mixture, can be patented even if its corresponding racemic mixtures are...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Actemra® (tocilizumab) / Tofidence™ (tocilizumab-bavi) / Tyenne® (tocilizumab-aazg) / Avtozma® (tocilizumab-anoh) -...

Venable LLP on

Tocilizumab Challenged Claim Types in IPRs: Claims are counted in each IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple IPRs are counted more than once. Within each IPR, claims are counted only once, whether they...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Neulasta® (pegfilgrastim) / Fulphila® (pegfilgrastim-jmdb) / Udenyca® (pegfilgrastim-cbqv) / Ziextenzo®...

Venable LLP on

Pegfilgrastim 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

Smart & Biggar

2025 mid-year highlights in Canadian life sciences IP and regulatory law

Smart & Biggar on

In the first half of 2025, the Rx IP Update team reported on a number of developments in Canadian life sciences IP and regulatory law. Below are our top stories....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

Jones Day

Acting Director Denies IPR Institution Based on “Settled Expectations”

Jones Day on

Under a new U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) policy issued in March 2025, pre-institution inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings are now bifurcated, consisting of a first phase in which the director considers...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC

Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, Appeal No. 2023-2173 (Fed. Cir. June 30, 2025) In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit reviewed construction of the transitional claim phrase...more

Venable LLP

Amgen Files Three New Prolia® / Xgeva® BPCIA Litigations Against Hikma, Shanghai Henlius Biotech, and Biocon’s Proposed...

Venable LLP on

On June 25, 2025, Amgen filed its sixth and seventh BPCIA lawsuits against proposed biosimilars of Prolia® / Xgeva® (denosumab), Case No. 1:25-cv-12152 (D.N.J.) against Hikma and Gedeon Richter’s RGB-14 and Case No....more

Venable LLP

Pembrolizumab Patent IPR Final Written Decision Issued and Director Review Requested

Venable LLP on

On June 9, 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) issued a Final Written Decision (“FWD”) in Merck’s IPR2024-00240 against The Johns Hopkins University’s (“JHU”) U.S. Patent No. 11,591,393 (“the ’393 patent”),...more

Venable LLP

Sarepta Files Two IPRs Against Genzyme’s Patents Gene Therapy Elevidys® Allegedly Infringes

Venable LLP on

On June 26, 2025, Sarepta Therapeutics filed IPR2025-01194, challenging as obvious claims 3-6 of Genzyme’s U.S. Patent No. 9,051,542 (“the ’542 patent), and IPR2025-01195 challenging claims 1-4, 6-7 and 11 of U.S. Patent No....more

Knobbe Martens

No Takebacks: The High Bar for Departing From Patent Lexicography

Knobbe Martens on

ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MODERNA, INC. - Before Taranto, Chen, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Once the high threshold for lexicography is met, there must be a...more

1,791 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 72

"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