News & Analysis as of

Pharmaceutical Patents CAFC

Hudnell Law Group

Federal Circuit Rejects Formalistic Shield to Prosecution History Estoppel

Hudnell Law Group on

On July 18, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a $106 million jury verdict in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC, No. 2023-2153, finding that Colibri’s infringement claim under...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

Robins Kaplan LLP

Azurity Pharms., Inc. v. Alkem Labs. Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The ’948 patent claims non-sterile drinkable liquid formulations of vancomycin, an antibiotic used to treat Clostridium difficile infection. These formulations are particularly...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending July 4, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, No. 2023-2173 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) June 30, 2025). Opinion by Scarsi, joined by Taranto and Stoll. Eye Therapies owns a patent that claims a method for reducing eye redness...more

MoFo Life Sciences

Is Your Claim Open or Closed? Claim Construction Takes on a New Meaning in Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC

MoFo Life Sciences on

On June 30, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, reversing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) claim construction of the phrase “consisting...more

Knobbe Martens

An Eye Toward Prosecution History

Knobbe Martens on

EYE THERAPIES, LLC v. SLAYBACK PHARMA LLC - Before Taranto, Stoll and Scarsi (sitting by designation). The patent’s prosecution history required a restrictive interpretation of the term “consisting essentially of.”...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Eye Therapies LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Patent law in many respects has its own language and idiosyncratic expressions, and one such respect involves so-called "transitional" words or phrases (discussed in greater depth in the Manual of Patent Examination Procedure...more

Haug Partners LLP

Federal Circuit Provides Further Guidance on Obvious Type Double Patenting For Patents Sharing Common Priority

Haug Partners LLP on

On June 9th, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Acadia Pharms. Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment of no invalidity for obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP)...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Eyes Open to the Past: Federal Circuit Holds Prosecution History Is Claim Construction Evidence

The Federal Circuit’s decision in Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC provides further insight into the tools available for patent claim construction. The Federal Circuit had previously held that a patent’s...more

Knobbe Martens

A Patent Does Not Guarantee the Patent Owner Will Be First to Market

Knobbe Martens on

INCYTE CORPORATION V. SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, LTD. - Before Moore, Prost and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. A district court erred in issuing a preliminary...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

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Enabling Anticipatory Prior Art Reference Need Only Enable a Single Embodiment of the Claim

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MODERNA, INC. [OPINION] (2023-2357, 06/04/2025) (Taranto, Chen, Hughes) - Taranto, J. The Court affirmed the district court’s claim...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Subject Matter Eligibility in the 21st Century: Echoes of pre-§ 103 Obviousness*

The evolution of subject matter eligibility after the Supreme Court's decisions in Prometheus v. Mayo, Alice v. CLS Bank, and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics has resulted in a regime of predictable...more

Venable LLP

Regeneron and Biocon Settle Litigation over EYLEA® Biosimilar Yesafili™

Venable LLP on

On April 15, 2025, Biocon announced it reached a settlement agreement with Regeneron, dismissing CAFC Appeal No. 24-2002 and Case No. 1:22-cv-00061 (N.D.W. Va.) / MDL 1:24-md-03103 (N.D.W. Va.) and allowing the...more

Knobbe Martens

Hard to Stomach: Things You Say to Prosecute a Patent Can and Will Be Used Against You

Knobbe Martens on

AZURITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD. Before Murphy, Moore, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Arguments and amendments made during prosecution of a parent...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Decision On Unpatentability, With The PTO Stepping In After Appellee Withdrew

A&O Shearman on

On April 15, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“Board”) decision finding all challenged claims of Sage Products, LLC’s patents anticipated based on...more

MoFo Life Sciences

In Patent Prosecution, You Have the Right to Remain Silent. Anything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You in the Court of Law

MoFo Life Sciences on

While a Miranda warning isn’t given prior to starting substantive examination, perhaps it should be. In Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories, Ltd., a precedential decision issued on April 8, 2025, the Federal...more

Haug Partners LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Presumption of Separateness in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al., C.A....

Haug Partners LLP on

In a formulation claim, if elements are listed separately, does this necessarily entail that those elements are “separate and distinct components”?  This was the question before the district court in Regeneron...more

Hogan Lovells

Reissued patents get Hatch-Waxman PTE based on original patent date, CAFC rules

Hogan Lovells on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently considered a novel question regarding calculation of the regulatory review period for patent term extension (PTE) under 35 USC § 156 for reissued patents....more

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.

CAFC Decision on Orange Book Listings for Drug/Device Combination Patents

On December 20th, 2024, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an important decision in Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals that impacts Orange Book (OB) listings for patents...more

Baker Donelson

A Baker's Dozen of Patent Law Developments for 2024

Baker Donelson on

The world of intellectual property law is always changing, and it can be difficult to keep up. Here are 13 developments in patent law so far in 2024 to help you stay in the know....more

Jenner & Block

Enablement Bar for Drug Patents

Jenner & Block on

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC) decision on enablement in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, 987 F.3d 1080 (CA Fed. 2021). The Court thus left in place a significant CAFC decision making it more...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Can Enablement and Written Description Bars be Lower for Method-Of-Treatment Patent Claims?

Patent offices may reject a patent application with claims reciting using a composition to treat a disease, based on the requirement that the claimed treatment is not fully supported by the application. In the U.S., such...more

Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, LLC

Amgen Ratifies CAFC’s Requirement to Enable a Claim’s Full Scope

The Court’s reasoning in Amgen v. Sanofi upholds the Federal Circuit’s long-standing requirement to enable the full scope of a claimed invention. Since the Patent Act of 1790, patent law has required describing inventions...more

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: Supreme Court Affirms High Enablement Bar for Drug Patents

Jenner & Block on

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC) decision on enablement in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, 987 F.3d 1080 (CA Fed. 2021). The Court thus left in place a significant decision making it more...more

42 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