Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Application of the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents to Amgen v. Hoechst Marion, Inc.
In the previous issue, we discussed the principle of the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents and provided several illustrations of cases that have addressed the same. In this issue, we apply the principle to the Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion, Inc. case, wherein the defendants Hoecht Marion and Transkarayotic Therapies (collectively 'TKT') were found liable for infringing several of Amgen's patents. Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion, Inc., 126 F. Supp. 2d 69 (D. Mass. 2001). Although the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents defense was not raised, this article discusses how this doctrine might have relieved TKT of liability.
Although Amgen asserted a number of patents against TKT, this article focuses on claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 5,756,349 (the '349 patent), the text of which is as follows:
1. Vertebrate cells which can be propagated in vitro and which are capable upon growth in culture of producing erythropoietin in the medium of their growth in excess of 100 U of erythropoietin per 106 cells in 48 hours as determined by radioimmunoassay, said cells comprising non-human DNA sequences that control transcription of DNA encoding human erythropoietin.
(Erythropoietin is a protein that stimulates the production of red blood cells.)
Amgen's Technology: By taking advantage of recombinant DNA techniques, Amgen developed a method for producing human erythropoietin (EPO) in quantities previously unattainable by purification from bodily fluids. In short, Amgen removes the gene that encodes EPO from a cell naturally containing the gene and then introduces (transfects) it with non-human control sequences (SV40 viral promoter) into a Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cell. Relative to the CHO cells, the promoter DNA and the human EPO gene are exogenous because the promoter and the EPO gene do not naturally reside in the CHO cells. Amgen, 126 F. Supp. 2d at 55.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.