On June 25, 2018, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the Federal Circuit's decision in Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, No. 17-1229.
In Helsinn, the Federal Circuit considered whether the America Invents Act ("AIA") narrowed the scope of the on-sale bar and, specifically, whether the addition of the phrase "or otherwise available to the public" to the post-AIA § 102(a) requires that a sale must publicly disclose the details of the invention subject to the sale in order to be invalidating. The district court answered that question in the affirmative.
The Federal Circuit reversed, declining to read the new § 102 language as requiring public disclosure of the invention and holding that the AIA did not change the law. The Federal Circuit instead held that only the existence of the sale need be made public to trigger the AIA on-sale bar. Helsinn petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari, framing the issue as follows: "Whether, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, an inventor's sale of an invention to a third party that is obligated to keep the invention confidential qualifies as prior art for purposes of determining the patentability of the invention." The Supreme Court granted the petition.
The Supreme Court's decision will have important consequences on the scope of what constitutes an invalidating sale for post-AIA patents. Briefing on the merits will take place during the summer, and the case will likely be scheduled for argument in fall 2018. A decision from the Supreme Court is likely before the end of June 2019.
Jones Day publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information purposes only and may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the Firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our "Contact Us" form, which can be found on our website at www.jonesday.com. The mailing of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Firm.