News & Analysis as of

Patent Infringement Pharmaceutical Patents Claim Construction

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Moderna, Inc.

Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Moderna, Inc., Appeal No. 2023-2357 (Fed. Cir. June 4, 2025) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a final judgment that Moderna’s mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine did...more

Venable LLP

Court Finds bluebird bio’s Gene Therapy Zynteglo® (betibeglogene autotemcel) Does Not Infringe San Rocco Therapeutics’ Patents

Venable LLP on

On May 16, 2025, the Court in Case No. 1:21-cv-01478 (D. Del.) granted bluebird bio’s motion for summary judgment, finding that its gene therapy Zynteglo® (betibeglogene autotemcel) does not infringe San Rocco Therapeutics‘...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: Statements Made During Prosecution of Parent Application Disavow Claim Scope in Subsequent Patents

The Federal Circuit affirmed a District of Delaware finding of non-infringement in an ANDA litigation due to the patentee’s clear and unmistakable disavowal of claim scope during prosecution. Specifically, the court held that...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Enbrel® (etanercept) / Erelzi® (etanercept-szzs) / Eticovo® (etanercept-ykro) - May 2025

Venable LLP on

Etanercept Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Rituxan® (rituximab) / Truxima® (rituximab-abbs) / Ruxience® (rituximab-pvvr) / Riabni™ (rituximab-arrx) - May 2025

Venable LLP on

Rituximab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Boehringer Ingelheim Pharms. Inc. v. Apotex Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Tradjenta® (linagliptin) - Case Name: Boehringer Ingelheim Pharms. Inc. v. Apotex Inc., Civ. No. 23-685-CFC, 2025 WL 71979 (D. Del. Jan. 10, 2025) (Connolly, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Tradjenta® (linagliptin);...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Taiho Pharma Co. v. MSN Labs Private Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Lonsurf® (tipiracil) - Case Name: Taiho Pharma Co. v. MSN Labs Private Ltd., No. 19-2342-JLH (D. Del. Jan. 23, 2025) (Hall, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Lonsurf® (tipiracil); U.S. Patent No. 10,457,666 (“the ’666...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Alcon Inc. v. Padagis Israel Pharms. Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Simbrinza® (brinzolamide / brimonidine) - Case Name: Alcon Inc. v. Padagis Israel Pharms. Ltd., Civ. No. 22-1422-WCB, 2025 WL 457119 (D. Del. Feb. 5, 2025) (Bryson, C.J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit:  Simbrinza®...more

Knobbe Martens

Hard to Stomach: Things You Say to Prosecute a Patent Can and Will Be Used Against You

Knobbe Martens on

AZURITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD. Before Murphy, Moore, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Arguments and amendments made during prosecution of a parent...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Prolia® / Xgeva® (denosumab) / Jubbonti® / Wyost® (denosumab-bbdz) / Ospomyv™ / Xbryk™ (denosumab-dssb) / Stoboclo®...

Venable LLP on

Denosumab Challenged Claim Types in Litigation: Claims are counted in each litigation, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple litigations are counted more than once. Within each litigation a claim is counted...more

MoFo Life Sciences

In Patent Prosecution, You Have the Right to Remain Silent. Anything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You in the Court of Law

MoFo Life Sciences on

While a Miranda warning isn’t given prior to starting substantive examination, perhaps it should be. In Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories, Ltd., a precedential decision issued on April 8, 2025, the Federal...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending April 11, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., No. 2023-1977 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) Apr. 8, 2025). Opinion by Murphy (sitting by designation), joined by Moore and Chen. Azurity owns a patent directed to non-sterile...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Prosecution Disclaimer Alive and Well, Especially in Closed Claim

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s noninfringement determination, finding that the presence of a disclaimed compound in the accused product precluded infringement. Azurity Pharm., Inc....more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Rituxan® (rituximab) / Truxima® (rituximab-abbs) / Ruxience® (rituximab-pvvr) / Riabni™ (rituximab-arrx) - April...

Venable LLP on

Rituximab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...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

Haug Partners LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Presumption of Separateness in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al., C.A....

Haug Partners LLP on

In a formulation claim, if elements are listed separately, does this necessarily entail that those elements are “separate and distinct components”?  This was the question before the district court in Regeneron...more

Irwin IP LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Loophole Allowing Patents To Cover Later Developed Technologies

Irwin IP LLP on

In re Entresto, 125 F.4th 1090 (Fed. Cir. 2025) - After Novartis’ patent on the blockbuster blood pressure medication Entresto was found invalid at the district court for covering technology that was developed after the...more

Goodwin

Federal Circuit Affirms Denial of Injunction Against Amgen in Aflibercept BPCIA Litigation

Goodwin on

On March 14, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia’s denial of a preliminary injunction against Amgen Inc. (“Amgen”) in the ongoing...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

DNA Genotek Inc. v. Spectrum Solutions LLC (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Sometimes important contributions to innovation can come from the mundane rather than the extraordinary. One (perhaps apocryphal) example comes from the story of the early development of television by Philo Farnsworth (the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Completing a recent jurisprudential "hat trick,"* the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court grant of a preliminary injunction against a biosimilar applicant for Regeneron's EYLEA biologic drug in Regeneron...more

BakerHostetler

A Later-Discovered Improvement to an Invention Cannot Be Used To Reach Back and Invalidate an Earlier-Filed Patent

BakerHostetler on

Novartis markets and sells a combination therapy of valsartan and sacubitril under the brand name Entresto® for the treatment of various forms of heart failure. MSN submitted an Abbreviated New Drug Application seeking...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: Federal Circuit Orders Remanded Case Reassigned to New Judge, Finding That Trial Judge’s Statements...

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - HD SILICON SOLUTIONS LLC v. MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INC. [OPINION] (2023-1397, 2/6/2025) (Lourie, Stoll, Cunningham) - Lourie, J. The Board affirmed the Final Written...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: Written Description and Enablement Depend on What a Patent 'Claims,' Not What the Claims Cover

The Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court decision that found a patent that did not describe after-arising technology failed to satisfy the written description requirement. In so doing, the Federal Circuit...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Cabometyx® (cabozantinib (L)-malate) - Case Name: Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd., No. 22-228-RGA, 2024 WL 4491176 (D. Del. Oct. 15, 2024) (Andrews, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Cabometyx®...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Melinta Therapeutics, LLC v. Nexus Pharms., Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Minocin® (minocycline) - Case Name: Melinta Therapeutics, LLC v. Nexus Pharms., Inc., Civ. No. 21-2636, 2024 WL 4799896 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 15, 2024) (Kness, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Minocin® (minocycline);...more

136 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 6

"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