News & Analysis as of

Prior Art Appeals Pharmaceutical Industry

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

Venable LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Unpatentability Findings in Gene Therapy Hemgenix® IPRs

Venable LLP on

On May 22, 2025, the CAFC affirmed the PTAB’s (Board) Final Written Decisions in Pfizer’s IPR2021-00925 and IPR2021-00926 finding all challenged claims of uniQure’s U.S. Patent No. 9,982,248 (“the ’248 patent”) unpatentable...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Affirms Findings Of Non-Obviousness And Infringement Of Method Of Treatment Patent Claiming Dosing Regimen For...

A&O Shearman on

On March 28, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion affirming the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey decision that Mylan Laboratories Ltd. (“Mylan”) induced...more

Irwin IP LLP

“Consisting of” Consequences: Prosecution Disclaimers Outweigh Pretrial Stipulations 

Irwin IP LLP on

The Federal Circuit recently opined on whether a stipulation in litigation can overcome a disclaimer made during the prosecution history of a patent. The Hatch-Waxman Act allows generic drug companies to use clinical results...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd.

Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., Appeal No. 2023-1977 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 8, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed that defendant Alkem’s proposed generic antibiotic did not...more

DLA Piper

Federal Circuit Refines Obviousness Framework for Drug and Biologic Dosing Regimens

DLA Piper on

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court ruling that a pharmaceutical dosing claim limitation was unpatentable due to obviousness-type double patenting. The court found...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Highlights the Importance of Separating Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis When Dealing with...

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

Knobbe Martens

Routine Optimization of Result-Effective Variable Can Bridge Gaps in Prior Art

Knobbe Martens on

PFIZER INC. v. SANOFI PASTEUR INC. - Before Lourie, Bryson, and Stark.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Federal Circuit Declines to Revive Opioid Overdose Remedy

On February 10, in Adapt Pharma Operations Ltd. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s holding that Adapt’s methods of treatment of opioid overdose is invalid as obvious. The...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - May 2021 #2

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - CAP EXPORT, LLC v. ZINUS, INC. [OPINION]  (2020-2087, 5/5/21) (Dyk, Bryson, Hughes) - Dyk, J. Affirming decision to set aside judgment and injunction pursuant to Federal Rule of...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Equivalent Disclosure Used to Satisfy Written Description Requirement

Invoking a newly minted equivalent disclosure doctrine, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the written description requirement of § 112 was satisfied in the interest of arriving at a...more

Smart & Biggar

Orders of prohibition relating to polymorphic form patent for PRISTIQ upheld on appeal

Smart & Biggar on

As previously reported, the Federal Court, in a pair of decisions, granted orders prohibiting Apotex and Teva from marketing their generic o-desmethyl-venlafaxine (ODV) succinate products (Pfizer’s PRISTIQ) until expiry of...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Attorney General’s Office May Weigh In on Constitutionality of IPRs involving Pre-AIA Patents

Troutman Pepper Locke on

The 2011 America Invents Act (AIA) provided a variety of new ways to administratively challenge patents, including the now widely used inter partes review (“IPR”) procedure. In two recent appeals of IPR decisions, Genentech...more

Goodwin

Federal Circuit Solicits U.S. Attorney General’s Views on Constitutionality of Subjecting Pre-AIA Patents to Inter Partes Review

Goodwin on

Genentech recently submitted two opening appellate briefs to the Federal Circuit in connection with its appeals from the Board’s final written decisions in Hospira’s IPRs, IPR2016-01771 and IPR2016-01837, which found that the...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases

Berkheimer v. HP Inc., Appeal No. 2017-1437 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 8, 2018) - In Berkheimer v. HP Inc., the Federal Circuit reviewed the District Court’s summary judgment finding that certain claims of a patent were invalid as...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Court Rejects Theory Of Derivation Based On FDA Requirement

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Federal Circuit decision in Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Mylan Institutional LLC may be more interesting for what Mylan argued than for what the Federal Circuit decided. However, it could be an important decision...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Genzyme Petitions Federal Circuit for Rehearing in Genzyme Therapeutic Products, Inc. v. Biomarin Pharmaceutical, Inc.

Many of the complaints from patent holders over the PTO's inter partes review process under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (codified in pertinent part at 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319) stem from how the Office has implemented...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Warner Chilcott Co, LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Warner Chilcott Co, LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Nos. 2014-1439, 2014-1441, 2014-1444, 2014-1445, 2014-1446, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21946 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 18, 2014) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Reyna and Taranto...more

McDermott Will & Emery

A Compound Is Obvious Where Only Minor Changes to a Prior Art “Lead Compound” Are Required to Make the Claimed Compound

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Teva Pharms USA, Inc. - Addressing the obviousness of a claimed compound where a person of skill would need to make only minor changes to a lead compound to arrive at the claimed invention,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Combining Two Drugs Is Not Always Obvious

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc. - Addressing the obviousness of combining two known hypertension medications, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a ruling of...more

McDermott Will & Emery

A Combination of References Need Only Provide a “Reasonable Expectation of Success”

Hoffmann La-Roche Inc. v. Apotex Inc. - Addressing the validity of a dosing regimen patent in Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower...more

21 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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