Under U.S. law, inventors own patent rights to their inventions unless and until they transfer such rights to another. Earlier this month,  the Federal... Read More »

Last week, in BASF v. Johnson Matthey, the Federal Circuit addressed the issue of whether the phrase “effective to catalyze” rendered claims indefinite... Read More »

Last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s granting of a preliminary injunction (PI) precluding Aurobindo from marketing its proposed... Read More »

Last month, the Supreme Court (in TC Heartland v. Kraft) recounted prior precedent standing for the proposition that 28 U.S.C. 1400(b) is the sole and exclusive... Read More »

Last month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Shire Development v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, finding that Watson’s generic version of LIALDA® did not... Read More »

Last week, the Delaware district court granted Aurobindo’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement of Reckitt’s patents directed to a... Read More »

In my article dated December 11, 2016 (“Altaire v. Paragon Post-Grant Review (PGR): Any Lessons Learned From This Early Pharma PGR?”), I concluded... Read More »

In a Post-Grant Review (“PGR”) at the U.S Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), a petitioner can challenge the validity of a patent on... Read More »

In Intendis v Glenmark, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents based on statements made by Glenmark to the... Read More »

It’s been a tough month for Yeda at the Federal Circuit – twice the court ruled against it on a written description/disclosure issue.  In UCB ... Read More »