Category Archives: Litigation Issues

Fed. Cir. in Helsinn v. Teva Declines Limiting the Requirements of the “On Sale” Bar

In Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, 525 US 55 (1988), the Supreme Court attempted to focus the factors invoking the on-sale bar of s.102, by holding that the claimed invention must both be the subject of a “commercial sale”(including offers for … Continue reading

Posted in 102 Patentability, Hatch-Waxman, Licensing, Litigation Issues | Leave a comment

Vanda v. Roxane Labs. – Are Two Natural Laws Better Than One?

As you will recall, in Prometheus v. Mayo, the Supreme Court held that a claim reciting a natural law had to have other non-conventional steps to pass muster under s. 101. The natural law in Mayo was the correlation between … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Interpretation, Federal Court, Hatch-Waxman, Litigation Issues, Obviousness, Section 101 | 2 Comments

UCB v. Yeda R&D Co. – No “Safe Harbor” for Unamended Claims

UCB sued Yeda for a DJ of non-infringement of US Patent No. 6,090,923 [Appeal No. 2015-1957 (Fed. Cir. September 8, 2016)].The main claim in question was directed to “A monoclonal antibody which specifically binds a human cytotoxin [having X properties].” … Continue reading

Posted in Litigation Issues, Post-Grant Issues, Written Description Requirements (WDR) | Leave a comment

Apotex v Wyeth Explores Structural Obviousness

Lately, I’ve been feeling that the only case law engaging enough to write about has involved S. 101 issues, so it was a welcome break to comment on some classic principles of organic chemistry. Apotex filed an IPR petition that … Continue reading

Posted in Federal Court, Litigation Issues, Prior Art | Leave a comment