Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- BioNTech Sues Moderna over mRNA Vaccine Technology
- CNIPA Issues Letter on Identity of Foreign Inventors
- REGENEXBIO Inc. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- Apple v. Squires: USPTO Director Has Unlimited Discretion on IPR Institution
- The Ghost in the Machine: Why GenAI Can Be Both a Brilliant Researcher and a Terrible Advocate
about
Category: Federal Circuit
-
By Donald Zuhn — On March 25, the Federal Circuit in Dawson v. Dawson affirmed a determination by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences that the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) failed to establish sole conception by Dr. Chandler Dawson of the claimed inventions in two patents assigned to InSite Vision Inc. The…
-
By Andrew Williams — Can a method of treatment claim be inherent in the prior art if neither the formulation nor the method of using the formulation twice a day were in the prior art? Earlier today, the Federal Circuit determined in Allergen v. Sandoz that a claimed method for treating glaucoma (which differed from the…
-
By Michael Greenfield — Contraceptives were the subject of the Federal Circuit's recent decision in Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. But, unfortunately, it's a rather fact-specific case with nothing of prurient or even much general legal interest to spice up the lonely patent practioner's day. The battle was over Bayer's RE37,564 patent…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Yesterday, in Biogen Idec, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the determination by the District Court for the Southern District of California that the claim term "anti-CD20 antibody" as used in U.S. Patent No. 7,682,612 was limited by prosecution history estoppel. The '612 patent is directed to the treatment…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In a 2-1 decision issued earlier today, the Federal Circuit affirmed a determination by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences upholding the rejection of the claims of U.S. Application No. 10/650,509 for obviousness-type double patenting over U.S. Patent No. 7,601,685. The '509 application, which is assigned to the California Institute…
-
By Andrew Williams — On the first day of February, the Federal Circuit rejected Impax's efforts to get out from under a preliminary injunction in a case captioned In re Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsule Patent Litigation. The opinion wasn't released until February 14, 2013, however, because it contained confidential information that needed to be redacted. …
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Whether ANDA litigation has had a positive or negative impact on generic drug availability is an open question, in view of several recent reports looking at the effects such litigation has had on both branded and generic drugs over the past thirty years. Indeed, the current squabble over "reverse payment"…
-
By Michael Greenfield — Those of you who dabble with chemical structures while prosecuting or litigating pharmaceutical patents may find Allergan v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., interesting. In this ANDA litigation brought by Allergan against Barr, Teva, and Sandoz ("Barr"), the Federal Circuit opined on issues of claim construction and obviousness with respect to Allergan's Lumigan®,…
-
By Andrew Williams — Late last year, in AstraZeneca v. Aurobindo (In re Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litigation), the Federal Circuit affirmed that a reissue patent covering the active ingredient of Crestor® was valid, enforceable, and infringed by all parties. In so doing, the Court discussed what it meant to be the submitter of an ANDA…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its sixth annual list of top biotech/pharma patent stories. For 2012, we identified fifteen stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe had (or are likely to have) the greatest impact on biotech/pharma patent practitioners…
Patent Docs 