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?
Adalimumab 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
The Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act (APPA) of 2023 unanimously passed the Senate on July 11, 2024. The APPA was first introduced to the House on January 30, 2023 by Representative John Cornyn (R-Tx), with the aim of...more
Clients often ask if a law firm can represent both brand and generic drug manufacturers. It’s a reasonable question, particularly when the popular perception is that potential conflicts pigeonhole law firms, forcing them to...more
UNIFIED PATENT COURT - The Unified Patent Court (UPC) should become a reality in 2022 or in the first few months of 2023. The Protocol on Provisional Application (PPA) of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (AUPC)...more
The Federal Circuit’s October 2020 split decision in GSK v. Teva made waves throughout the pharmaceutical industry and among Hatch-Waxman litigators. In the broadest reading, some see the majority opinion as rendering any...more
Legal, Regulatory and Commercial Perspectives on the International Biosimilars Marketplace - The Global Biosimilars market is expected to grow robustly. Market watchers anticipate that Europe in particular will experience...more
Addressing an appeal from four related actions concerning Orange Book patents covering Suboxone® sublingual film, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgments that certain generic...more
Addressing the validity of patents involved in a Hatch-Waxman litigation, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that claims were invalid for lack of an adequate written description because the specification...more
As post-Actavis antitrust litigation over so-called “reverse payment” patent settlements proceeds, courts continue to provide further illumination about what evidence a private plaintiff would need to offer to survive summary...more
Settlement agreement between a co-defendant and plaintiff in a Hatch-Waxman patent litigation matter is discoverable, ruled Judge Bryson in Allergan, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al., Case No. 15-1455 (E.D. Tex.,...more
Pharmaceutical and biotech companies breathed a sigh of relief Monday when the Federal Circuit unanimously ruled in a precedential opinion that the mere sale of manufacturing services to create embodiments of a patented...more
The court’s decision provides insight into which activities trigger the on-sale bar provision. On July 11, in The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., No. 14-1469 (Fed. Cir. July 11, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...more
On July 11, 2016, in The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc. (Case Nos. 2014-1469, -1504), the en banc Federal Circuit unanimously concluded that “to be ‘on sale’ under § 102(b), a product must be the subject of a commercial sale...more
In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a transaction with a contract manufacturer gave rise to an on sale bar that invalidated The Medicines Company’s Angiomax® patents. Are the facts of this...more