We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 262

Biosig claims pass reasonable certainty test

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 28 2015

In its decision on remand from the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit once again held the Biosig patent claims not indefinite, reversing the district

Amicus briefs on biosimilar patent litigation

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 23 2015

Amgen has appealed the district court decision denying its motion for a preliminary injunction to keep Sandoz' biosimilar version of Neupogen off

Waiting on Sequenom

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 7 2015

As I write this there’s a voice in my head saying, “Be careful what you wish for!” but it has been five months since Sequenom was argued at the

Non-legal perspectives on isolated DNA: the Watson and Holman amicus briefs in the Myriad remand

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 25 2012

The most interesting briefs in the Federal Circuit remand of Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (the ACLU “gene patenting”BRCA1 case) may be those submitted by James D. Watson and Christopher M. Holman, which each present non-legal perspectives on the issues before the court

Federal Circuit finds distribution of glucose meters exhausts method patent claims

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 14 2013

In LifeScan Scotland, Ltd. V. Shasta Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit found that LifeScan's distribution of its One-Touch Ultra glucose meters

Federal Circuit looks for a different kind of unexpected results in BMS v. Teva

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 2 2014

In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that BMS’s Baraclude patent

The “lead compound” approach to obviousness and obviousness-type double patenting

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 7 2012

In Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s determination that the claims at issue were neither obvious nor invalid under the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting based on a “lead compound” approach to the obviousness determinations

District court sides with USPTO on patent term adjustment

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 15 2014

In Abraxis Bioscience, LLC v. Kappos, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-00730., (D.D.C. Jan. 08, 2014), Judge Howell of the U.S. District Court for the

The Federal Circuit hears oral arguments in Myriad isolated DNA case

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 4 2011

On April 4, 2011, Judges Lourie, Bryson, and Moore at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, No. 09-Civ-4515, i.e., the ACLUMyriad “gene patenting” case

A tale of two antibodies (Centocor Part II)

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 3 2011

As I wrotelast week, the Federal Circuit held in Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, that the human antibody claims that Centocor had asserted against Abbott's Humira product are invalid for failing to satisfy the written description requirement of 35 USC 112