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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 11-20 of 853

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


An in-depth look at USPTO patent quality problems
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 21 2015

The comment period for the USPTO's proposed patent quality initiatives is open until May 6, 2015, and the Office of Inspector General for the


Stricter standing for inter partes review?
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 14 2015

Neither the statutes nor the regulations governing Inter Partes Review (IPR) require the party challenging the patent to have been charged with


Apotex has standing despite Benicar patent disclaimer
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 9 2015

In Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that Apotex has standing to seek a declaratory judgment that it does not infringe


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


No collateral challenge of patent application revival
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • March 31 2015

In Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC v. Lee, the Federal Circuit held that the USPTO's decision to revive a patent application &8220;is not subject to


Patent Term Adjustment in the post-RCE period
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • March 26 2015

We know from Novartis v. Lee that a patent application does not earn "B delay" type Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) from the time an RCE is filed until a


Federal Circuit finds disclaimer based on “object of invention” language
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • March 25 2015

The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Pacing Technologies, LLC v. Garmin International, Inc. (No. 2014-1396) provides patent litigators with a


Judge finds biosimilar patent procedures optional
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • March 23 2015

Judge Seeborg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order inAmgen, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., ruling that the