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 5,597

Nautilus standard sinks Dow patents
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • August 31 2015

Dow Chemical Company ("Dow") lost a ruling that competitor NOVA Chemical Corporation and NOVA Chemicals Inc. (collectively "NOVA") infringed claims


Antitrust implication of recent FTC patent related agreement
  • Arnall Golden Gregory LLP
  • USA
  • August 31 2015

In recent years, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has refocused its efforts on the interplay between the patent system and antitrust law


For BioPharma, citing relevant art during prosecution does not appear to minimize IPR risk
  • Fanelli Haag
  • USA
  • August 31 2015

For BioPharma patents, we were curious whether art that formed the basis for IPR institution was "newly discovered" prior art, or whether it was art


Amgen and Apotex do the biosimilar patent dance
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • August 27 2015

Amgen has filed a complaint under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), asserting that a biosimilar application filed by Apotex


Contract manufacturing is a commercial transaction for purpose of “on-sale” bar
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 27 2015

Addressing the application of the on-sale bar under 102(b), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the claims of an asserted


Direct infringement motion to dismiss under Form 18 granted
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 27 2015

Addressing pleading requirements for direct and indirect infringement, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s


Shall means shall . . . unless it doesn’t
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 27 2015

Addressing issues of first impression related to the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA), which the U.S. Court of Appeals


BPCIA dance partners request en banc rehearing and Amgen seeks temporary injunction
  • Fish & Richardson PC
  • USA
  • August 27 2015

On July 21, 2015, the Federal Circuit panel issued its opinion in Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. (2015-1499) providing its interpretation of the Biologics


Otsuka successful in stay application: Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd v Generic Health Pty Ltd 2015 FCA 848
  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • Australia
  • August 26 2015

Further to our post of 7 July 2015, the proceedings brought by Otsuka and Bristol Myers Squibb (the "exclusive licensee" of Otsuka's patents for


Kyle Bass loses round 1 of IPR attack against pharmabiotech patents
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • August 26 2015

On August 24, 2015, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) declined institution of two petitions filed by Coalition For Affordable Drugs for Inter