Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal Circuit Decision Clarifies Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Patent Term Adjustments In Allergan v. MSN Laboratories
On August 13, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling in Allergan USA Inc. et al. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd. et al., Case Number 24-1061, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This decision reversed the District of Delaware's application of the Federal Circuit precedent in In re: Cellect LLC to invalidate a claim in an earlier-filed parent application over admittedly patentably indistinct claims in later-filed (and earlier-expired) child patents. This decision has resolved some substantial questions about the application of obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) that had been raised by last year's In re Cellect decision.
Case Background
Allergan, Janssen, and Eden Biodesigns (collectively, Allergan) asserted patent infringement against Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries (Sun) after Sun filed an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) seeking U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval to market and sell a generic version of Allergan's bowel treatment drug, Viberzi.
Following a three-day bench trial focusing on the Viberzi patents, the district court held that the asserted claim in parent patent 7,741,356 (the '356 Patent) was invalid for ODP over claims of two later-filed child patents. ODP is a judicially created rule that, in the absence of a terminal disclaimer, prevents the same inventor from obtaining multiple patents for a single invention. See, Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 804. The doctrine's primary goal is to prevent an unjustified extension of patent exclusivity beyond the life of a patent. (Opinion at 11.)
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.