Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
A Conversation with Phil Hamzik
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
From Academia to the Marketplace: The Ins and Outs of University Spinout Licenses with Dan O’Korn
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
5 Key Takeaways | Hot Topics in Biopharma
Business Better Podcast Episode: Accelerating Life Sciences: How Accelerators and Education Are Joining Forces to Catapult the Life Sciences Industry
Is Your Life Sciences Patent Enabled? The U.S. Supreme Court Is Considering That Question
Webinar: Orange Book listing sheets under the microscope
Federal Appeals Court Hears Arguments on CAR T-Cell Therapy Patent Dispute
NGE On Demand: COVID-19 and IP Waiver for Patent Protection with Kevin O'Connor and Olivia Luk Bedi
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Dr. Claire Fraser
Enforcing IP in a Pandemic: Considerations, Risks, Strategies
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Walter Isaacson, Part 1
Verdict in T-Cell Immunotherapy IP Case Tests 'Reasonable Royalty' Concept for Large Damage Awards
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: FDA Regulatory and Patent Implications of the Transition Provision of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act
IP(DC) Podcast: Patent Battles – New Patent Initiatives on the Hill & Notable CAFC/SCOTUS Decisions
Patent law in Europe: What pharmaceutical companies need to know
A data-driven era: Why digital tools are critical to life sciences players
IS THE A IN ANDA BEGINNING TO MEAN ANTITRUST?
This Federal Circuit opinion analyzes lexicography in the context of claim construction. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals owns U.S. Patent Nos. 11,246,933 (parent) and 11,382,979 (child). These patents relate to biodegradable...more
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
Denosumab Challenged Claim Types in Litigation: Claims are counted in each litigation, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple litigations are counted more than once. Within each litigation a claim is counted...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
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
The Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court decision that found a patent that did not describe after-arising technology failed to satisfy the written description requirement. In so doing, the Federal Circuit...more
Cabometyx® (cabozantinib (L)-malate) - Case Name: Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd., No. 22-228-RGA, 2024 WL 4491176 (D. Del. Oct. 15, 2024) (Andrews, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Cabometyx®...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
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
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation v. Torrent Pharma Inc., No. 23-2218 (Fed. Cir. 2025) — On January 10, 2025, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s opinion that claims of a Novartis patent are invalid for lack...more
2024 was an active year in Canadian patent law, with the Federal Court issuing several decisions on the merits regarding invalidity and/or infringement. The courts also considered issues of the regulation of patent agents,...more
Before Lourie, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patent was not invalid for lack of written description for failing to describe the specific infringing embodiment...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
Exeltis USA, Inc. and other parties (Exeltis) recently prevailed against Lupin Ltd. and Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Lupin) in a patent infringement suit brought in the District of Delaware. After a three-day bench trial, the...more
Vascular Solutions LLC, et al. v. Medtronic, Inc., et al., No. 2024-1398 (Fed. Cir. (D. Minn.) Sept. 16, 2024). Opinion by Mazzant (sitting by designation), joined by Moore and Prost....more
We are pleased to share Sheppard Mullin’s inaugural “Year in Review” report that collects and reports on most key patent law-related Federal Circuit decisions for 2023. This is a follow up to the quarterly report we...more
Proper construction of claim limitations reciting the chemical property of pH (which denotes the concentration of hydrogen ions in a solution as an indication of acidity) has arisen several times in district court and Federal...more
Federal Circuit Orders District Court to Consider Extrinsic Evidence in Claim Construction - In Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal No. 22-1889, the Federal Circuit held that where a...more
In a recent precedential opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated an infringement judgement against Mylan (Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 2022-1889, Fed. Cir. Nov. 6,...more
This week’s case of the (recent) week could serve as a crash course in several areas of patent law. It touches on Hatch-Waxman litigation and the Orange Book, claim construction, anticipation/obviousness, written description...more
Over the last 20-plus years, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit cases concerning written description and enablement have become a hot-button issue in the chemical and life sciences practices. The year 2021 was no...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...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
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more