Tag Archives: Abbott

Federal Circuit Finds Wyeth Restenosis Claims Invalid As Not Enabled

In Wyeth v. Abbott Laboratories, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that the claims at issue are invalid for failing to satisfy the enablement requirement of 35 USC § 112. The court took only 10 pages to explain why a specification that describes one specific compound did not enable claims encompassing tens of … Continue reading this entry

A Look At Abbott's Citizen Petition Against The Biologics Price Competition And Innovation Act

I am pleased to introduce Taylor Corbitt as a new author for PharmaPatentsBlog. Taylor is an associate in our Chemical, Biotechnology & Pharmaceutical Practice and works out of our Chicago office. ~Courtenay Brinckerhoff When the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, those hoping to benefit from the portion … Continue reading this entry

Therasense Decision "Tightens" Inequitable Conduct Standard

On May 25, 2011, the Federal Circuit issued its long-awaited en banc decision in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. After a panel affirmed the district court’s finding of inequitable conduct, the court agreed to rehear the appeal en banc in order to revisit the law of inequitable conduct. The court’s decision “tightens the standards” … Continue reading this entry

Join Me In a Telebriefing Seminar on Centocor

On Thursday, March 31, at 3:00 PM Eastern Time (12:00 PM Pacific Time), I will be speaking during a Law Seminars International TeleBriefing titled “Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories,” discussing the impact of the Federal Circuit’s recent decision. The panel consists of: Donald L. Zuhn, Ph.D, Esq., McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP, … Continue reading this entry

Stand-Off On Diligence Provisions: Depomed and Abbott Terminate License Agreement

On March 16, 2011, Depomed, Inc. disclosed in an SEC filing that it entered into a Settlement Agreement with Abbott Laboratories to terminate an exclusive license agreement between the parties relating to Depomed's gabapentin product. I have been paying close attention to this situation because it involved a potential dispute between the parties as to the meaning of diligence provisions in the license agreement. … Continue reading this entry

A Tale of Two Antibodies (Centocor Part II)

As I wrote last week, the Federal Circuit held in Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, that the human antibody claims that Centocor had asserted against Abbott’s Humira® product are invalid for failing to satisfy the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112. The holding is getting lots of attention because it will negate a … Continue reading this entry

The Written Description Requirement for Antibodies (Centocor Part I)

Yesterday, in Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, the Federal Circuit held that the human antibody claims that Centocor had asserted against Abbott’s Humira® product (claims 2, 3, 14 and 15 of U.S. 7,070,775) are invalid for failing to satisfy the written description requirement of 35 USC § 112. (This decision will negate a $1.67 billion damages … Continue reading this entry

Collaboration & License Agreement Review: Elagolix

On June 15, 2010, Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc. and Abbott International Luxembourg S.à r.l entered into a $575 million collaboration deal for the development and commercialization of elagolix, Neurocrine’s novel, first-in-class oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the treatment of endometriosis-related pain and uterine fibroids. The collaboration agreement was filed by Neurocrine with the U.S. Securities and Exchange … Continue reading this entry

Will The Federal Circuit's Therasense Decision Solve The McKesson Problem?

This week the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in its en banc rehearing of Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. As reflected in the en banc order, the court took this case en banc in order to reconsider—and hopefully reform—the law of inequitable conduct. The court’s decision could solve the McKesson problem and rein … Continue reading this entry