Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. (2026)
- Constellation Designs, LLC v. LG Electronics Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- PTAB Reverses § 101 Rejection Where Examiner Failed to Follow the Office’s Own Guidance
- Collision Communications v. Samsung: What Good Did the Government’s Statement of Interest Do?
about
Month: April 2009
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier today, the House Committee on the Judiciary heard testimony from seven witnesses (and accepted written testimony from other interested parties) regarding the House patent reform bill (H.R. 1260). Although the hearing was not made available for online viewing, written testimony from the witnesses who testified at the hearing can…
-
By Donald Zuhn — On Monday, the House Committee on the Judiciary announced that it would be holding on hearing on its patent reform bill (H.R. 1260) on April 30, 2009 at 10:00 AM (Eastern). Although the Committee posted a notice regarding the hearing on its website, it did not release a witness list…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier today, California Healthcare Institute president and CEO Dr. David Gollaher provided Patent Docs with an update regarding the status of patent reform and follow-on biologics legislation in the 111th Congress. The California Healthcare Institute (CHI) is an independent organization comprising more than 250 biomedical companies and academic and research…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Johnson & Johnson: 5-Year Exclusivity Period Would Kill Incentives to Innovate Last month, Amgen Inc. Vice President Stuart Watt asserted that any follow-on biologics regulatory pathway established by Congress would have to specify an exclusivity period of at least 12 years in order to provide incentives to innovator drug companies…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Two pronouncements, one from the Supreme Court and the other from the Federal Circuit, portend the parlous state that could await American innovation should judges come to believe that that their judgment is as sound as that of actual innovators. From the Federal Circuit's In re Kubin decision (citing…
-
By Sherri Oslick — About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases, and a few interesting cases will be selected for periodic monitoring. Bone Care International LLC et al. v. Eagle Pharmaceuticals Inc.1:09-cv-00285; filed April 23, 2009 in the District Court of Delaware Infringement of…
-
April 27-28, 2009 – 3rd Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Conference*** (American Conference Institute) – New York, NY April 29-30, 2009 – Corporate IP Counsel Summit (World Research Group) – New York, NY May 18-21, 2009 – BIO International Convention (Biotechnology Industry Organization) – Atlanta, GA May 20, 2009 – Tafas v. Doll — Dissecting the…
-
American Conference Institute (ACI) will be offering a webinar entitled: "Tafas v. Doll — Dissecting the Decision and Preparing for Resurgence of USPTO Rules Limiting Patent Claims" on May 20, 2009 from 1:00-2:30 PM (EST). Michele Cimbala, Ph.D.; Elizabeth Haanes, Ph.D.; Eric Steffe; and Robert Greene Sterne of Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox will focus…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Late last week, PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), a trade association representing the U.S. venture capital industry, announced the release of their quarterly MoneyTree Report (based on data from Thomson Reuters), which showed that venture capitalists had invested $3.0 billion in 549 deals in the first quarter…
-
By Donald Zuhn — For the past two years, much of the debate surrounding the various follow-on biologics bills that have been introduced in Congress has centered on the exclusivity periods provided by each bill. So far, three follow-on biologics bills have been introduced in the 111th Congress: H.R. 1427 and its companion bill,…
Patent Docs 