The Federal Circuit Finds Functionally-Based Genus Claims to Be Invalid for Lack of Written Description

A recent Federal Circuit case shows that broad, functionally-defined genus claims are susceptible to written-description invalidity challenges.  In AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. v. Janssen Biotech, Inc. et al., the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict invalidating a patent, finding that there was substantial evidence to conclude that the claims failed to meet the Patent […]

Obviousness holding reinforces the importance of claim scope

Last week, in Allergan Inc. v. Apotex Inc., a panel of the Federal Circuit reversed a finding from the Middle District of North Carolina that patents covering Allergan’s Latisse® (bimatoprost ophthalmic solution) were not invalid for obviousness.  In doing so, the Federal Circuit reinforced the principle that the obviousness analysis, including secondary considerations of nonobviousness, […]

Supreme Court Rules No Liability for Induced Infringement Without Actual Infringement – Go Figure

In Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., handed down last week, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that there can be no liability for induced patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) if no one has directly infringed the patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). While that principle may seem self-evident, it was not so […]

Supreme Court Eases Federal Circuit’s “Insolubly Ambiguous” Test For Indefiniteness Defense

This morning, in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., the Supreme Court rejected the Federal Circuit’s formulation of the definiteness requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112, para. 2.  Under the now-abandoned iteration of the definiteness test, claims were deemed to have satisfied the statutory requirement so long as they were “amenable to construction” and “not insolubly […]

What’s your story? Part II

In a previous post, we wrote about developing trial themes early. In this post, we explore the importance of using depositions to support that trial theme. In ANDA cases, particularly those with multiple defendants, we have noticed a trend. Attorneys are not taking the time to adequately prepare for depositions or to think strategically about their […]

Federal Circuit Decides “a Patient” is Not Restricted to a Single Patient

In the recent Braintree Labs v. Novel Labs, the Federal Circuit may have limited the value of composition for methods of treatment claims.  The patent-in-suit related to compositions for preparing the bowels of a patient ready for colonoscopy.  In particular, the claims were to a bowel prep composition “for inducing purgation of the colon of […]

Arguments by Analogy Can Win The Day For Generics Asserting Obviousness Defense

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a decision by the District of New Jersey finding two patents owned by Hoffmann-La Roche invalid for obviousness.  The patents-at-issue in Hoffmann-La Roche v. Apotex Inc., No. 2013-1128, are directed to methods of treating osteoporosis through a once-monthly administration of ibandronate, commercially available as Boniva.  The Court applied surrogate testing […]