Popular, Claim Construction, Pharmaceutical Industry

A Later-Discovered Improvement to an Invention Cannot Be Used To Reach Back and Invalidate an Earlier-Filed Patent

BakerHostetler on 3/11/2025

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

Vectura Ltd. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC: Federal Circuit Panel Affirms Vectura’s $90 Million Damages Award

Haug Partners LLP on 12/1/2020

On November 19, 2020, a unanimous panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) decided Vectura Ltd. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC, affirming a $90 million verdict. Vectura Ltd. (“Vectura”) sued...more

Mylan and Partner Biocon Win on Insulin Ruling

Goodwin on 3/13/2020

We previously reported on Judge Chesler’s claim construction order in Sanofi-Aventis v. Mylan et al. concerning Mylan’s proposed insulin glargine pen device, Vystra. This week, following a 5-day bench trial held on December...more

Seedlings’ LifeCard patent found invalid and not infringed by Pfizer’s EpiPen

Smart & Biggar on 2/6/2020

Update: On July 28, 2021, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Seedling’s appeal from Justice Grammond’s decision: Seedlings Life Science Ventures, LLC v Pfizer Canada ULC, 2021 FCA 154 (see article here). On January 2,...more

Hospira Asks Federal Circuit to Take Fresh Look at Safe Harbor Ruling in Epoetin Biosimilar Dispute

Goodwin on 1/22/2020

Last month, a three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit affirmed a Delaware district court’s judgment of infringement against Hospira and $70 million damages award to Amgen in the parties’ BPCIA litigation regarding Hospira’s...more

Teva and Its Potential Impact on Patent Litigation

K&L Gates LLP on 1/30/2015

The Supreme Court recently handed down its 7-2 opinion in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. The case involved a Federal Circuit review of a district court’s determination that Teva’s patent claims were not...more

Supreme Court Starts 2015 Off with Focus on Facts Shaping Intellectual Property Disputes

Robinson & Cole LLP on 1/23/2015

The U.S. Supreme Court kicked 2015 off with an intellectual property bang, issuing two important rulings earlier this week. Both decisions focus on the facts underpinning intellectual property disputes—who decides them and...more

Supreme Court Refines the Federal Circuit’s Standard of Review for Claim Construction

McCarter & English, LLP on 1/22/2015

The Federal Circuit’s high rate of reversal of district court claim constructions is well documented. The de novo standard of review applied by the Federal Circuit to all aspects of claim construction has played a large part...more

Is The Supreme Court’s Teva V. Sandoz Decision A “Game Changer” In Patent Cases?

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC on 1/21/2015

On January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. holding that “clear error,” not “de novo,” is the correct standard of appellate review for underlying factual...more

"Supreme Court Mandates a Clear Error Standard of Review for Factual Findings Underlying Claim Construction"

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on 1/21/2015

In a 7-2 decision issued on January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., held that the Federal Circuit must review factual findings underlying claim construction for clear...more

Breaking: Supreme Court Rules on Appellate Review Standard for Patent Claim Construction

Polsinelli on 1/21/2015

Today, in Teva Pharmaceutical USA, Inc., et al. v. Sandoz, Inc. et al., the Supreme Court issued a long-awaited opinion that changes the standard of appellate review for a trial court's decision regarding construction of a...more

Today's Popular Updates › Claim Construction › Pharmaceutical Industry

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"