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: 1-10 of 78

Trade dress protection: eye candy
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • April 30 2009

The sweeping competition injected into the industry by generic-drug manufacturers has increased the need for brand-name drugmakers to boost consumer recognition of, and desire for, their branded products


Podcast: Barbara Rudolph and Kai Rajan on Legal Issues Surrounding 3D Bioprinting
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • March 17 2016

Recent advances in technology have enabled 3D printing of biocompatible parts, driving major innovations in the medical industry. At the same time


Federal patent laws preempt District of Columbia statute that imposes limits on “excessive” prices for patented drugs
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2007

In Biotechnology Industry Organization v. District of Columbia, No. 06-1593 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2007), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling that the District of Columbia’s (“the District” or “D.C.”) Prescription Drug Excessive Price Act of 2005, codified at D.C. Code 28-4551 to 28-4555 (“the Act”), is preempted by federal patent laws, and affirmed an injunction that prevents its enforcement


Follow-on biologics: a patent litigation perspective
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • August 22 2009

In whatever form biosimilar legislation might take, patent holders will need to review their patent portfolios carefully


Prior art patent’s dosage guidelines failed to provide sufficient guidance to prescribe a treatment regimen and did not enable claimed invention so as to anticipate patent-in-suit
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • December 19 2008

In Impax Laboratories, Inc. v. Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 07-1513 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 3, 2008), the Federal Circuit held that the district court correctly determined that U.S. Patent No. 5,236,940 (“the ’940 patent”) was not an enabling prior art reference and therefore did not anticipate U.S. Patent No. 5,527,814 (“the ’814 patent”) owned by Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Aventis”


Federal Circuit clarifies that the rule against reissue recapture applies to subject matter surrendered during prosecution of related patent applications
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • May 31 2010

In MBO Laboratories, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., No. 08-1288 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 12, 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding of invalidity of claims 27, 28, 32, and 33 of U.S. Reissue Patent No. 36,885 (“the RE ’885 patent”) based on the rule against recapture, and reversed the district court’s holding of invalidity of all other claims


Hatch-Waxman counterclaim provision does not permit generic manufacturer to challenge use code applied to pioneering manufacturer’s Orange Book listed patent
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • May 31 2010

In Novo Nordisk AS v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd., No. 10-1001 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 14, 2010), the Federal Circuit reversed and vacated the district court’s injunction ordering plaintiffs to replace the current Orange Book use code of a pharmaceutical product with its former use code listing


Ordinary skill cannot substitute for disclosure of an invention’s novel aspects to satisfy the enablement requirement
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • May 31 2010

In ALZA Corp. v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, LLC, No. 09-1350 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 26, 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,919,373 (“the ’373 patent”) were invalid for lack of enablement


Preparing your patent portfolio for follow-on biologics
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • March 29 2010

On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law health insurance reform legislation, H.R. 3590 , a bill which has generated enormous media coverage and publicity


New and improved drug product eligible for patent term extension pursuant to 35 u.s.c. 156
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • June 30 2010

In Photocure ASA v. Kappos, No. 09-1393 (Fed. Cir. May 10, 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s reversal of the PTO’s denial of Photocure ASA’s (“Photocure”) request for a patent term extension pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 156