Recent Posts
- Hikma v. Vanda: Oral Argument Recap
- Teva v. Lilly should not be read as creating a new 112 rule for method of use claims
- Should ANDA filers be using the PTAB to mount early challenges to OB patents?
- Switching to WordPress
- Judge Hughes concurrence highlights post grant review appeal standing issue for pharma cases
Category: Validity–Obviousness
-
by: Rocco J. Screnci This is the second post in a two-part series on obviousness-type double patenting (“ODP”). Part one summarized the two recent precedential Federal Circuit decisions in this area. To sum up where last post left off: The Federal Circuit’s decision in Cellect initially seemed to drastically expand the application of ODP,…
-
by: Rocco J. Screnci This post is the first in a two-part series about recent developments in the law of double patenting. This post provides relevant background and summarizes the Federal Circuit’s recent decisions in In re Cellect, 81 F.4th 1216 (Fed. Cir. 2023) and Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Priv. Ltd.,…
-
Pfizer Inc. et al. v. Teva Pharms. USA et al., No. 2012-1576 (Fed. Cir.) Teva and several other generic pharmaceutical companies each submitted an ANDA seeking approval to market a generic version of Lyrica, for treating seizures and pain. In a unanimous decision last Thursday, the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of the U.S. District…
-
Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc., IPR2013-00368, IPR2013-00371, IPR2013-00372 (PTAB) by Robert F. Kappers The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a trio of related decisions on December 17, 2013, each instituting inter partes review of one of three related patents on once-daily formulations of tetracycline. On June 20, 2013, Amneal Pharmaceuticals filed…
-
Galderma Labs., L.P. et al. v. Tolmar, Inc., No. 2013-1034 (Fed. Cir.) by Dunstan H. Barnes On December 11, 2013, a three-judge Federal Circuit panel struck down the asserted claims of five patents belonging to Galderma Laboratories for being invalid as obvious. In Judge Sharon Prost's opinion for the court, joined by Judge…
-
Cadence Pharms., Inc. v. Exela Scis., LLC, No. 11-733-LPS (D. Del.) by Dunstan H. Barnes On November 22, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware issued a Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction barring Exela from manufacturing a generic version of OFIRMEV®, which is an injectable liquid acetaminophen composition. Judge Leonard Stark…
-
Accord Healthcare v. Eli Lilly and Co., IPR2013-00356 (PTAB) by Herbert D. Hart III On October 1, 2013, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a decision denying the petition for inter partes review filed by Accord Healthcare targeting Eli Lilly's U.S. Patent No. 7,772,209. The '209 patent is listed in the Orange Book…
-
Novo Nordisk v. Caraco Pharm. Labs., No. 2011-1223 (Fed. Cir.) In its third trip to the Federal Circuit, the court on Tuesday affirmed a decision holding claim 4 of Novo's U.S. Patent No. 6,677,358 invalid as obvious. Claim 4 of the '358 patent, listed in the Orange Book for PRANDIN (repaglinide) tablets, is directed to "[a] method…
-
Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Teva Pharms., No. 10-805-CJB (D. Del.) by Aaron F. Barkoff Today, in the District of Delaware, Judge Burke issued a 171-page opinion holding that claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 5,206,244, covering the entecavir molecule, is invalid as obvious. Entecavir is the active ingredient in Baraclude tablets, which are indicated for…
-
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines , No. 2011-1561 (Fed. Cir.) by Aaron F. Barkoff Lilly's anticancer drug Alimta (pemetrexed) is approved for the treatment of mesothelioma and non-small cell lung cancer. Teva, Barr and APP filed ANDAs seeking approval to market generic versions of Alimta prior to the expiration of…
Orange Book Blog 