Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Hikma v. Amarin at the Supreme Court: The Parties’ Opening Briefs
- Teva Pharmaceuticals International v. Eli Lilly & Co. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- USPTO Extends Artificial Intelligence Search Automated Pilot Program (ASAP!)
- USPTO Announces That It Has Turned the Corner on Unexamined Application Backlog
- Reasons for the PTAB’s Priority Determination in Broad’s Favor (Perhaps)
about
Category: Double Patenting
-
By Donald Zuhn — On May 6, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences affirming the final rejection of U.S. Application No. 10/618,526 for obviousness-type double patenting. Appellants Frits Jacobus Fallaux, Robert Cornelis Hoeben, Alex Jan Van Der Eb, Abraham Bout, and Domenico Valerio are the named…
-
By Donald Zuhn — The Federal Circuit today affirmed a determination by the District Court for the District of Delaware that U.S. Patent No. 5,583,122 was not invalid as obvious nor invalid for obviousness-type double patenting. The '122 patent, which is owned by Plaintiff-Appellee Procter & Gamble Co. (P&G), relates to the compound risedronate,…
Patent Docs 