In Pozen, Inc. v. Par Pharmaceutical Inc., the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s determination that the patents at issue were not invalid as obvious and were infringed by the subject Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDAs). Comparing this case to In re Droge, I cannot help but wonder how much the procedural posture impacted the Federal Circuit’s decisions. While the court reached opposite determinations as to obviousness, in each case it affirmed the decision on appeal. Continue reading this entry
Tag Archives: Par
Subscribe to This Blog
Topics
- 101
- 102
- 103
- Bilski
- Biosimilars
- Claim Construction
- District Court Decisions
- Doctrine of Equivalents
- Duty of Disclosure
- Enablement
- Federal Circuit Decisions
- Inequitable Conduct
- Infringement
- International Patent Practice
- Life Sciences Agreements
- Myriad
- Obviousness Type Double Patenting
- Patent Office Practice
- Patent Reform
- Patent Term Adjustment
- Patent Term Extension
- Patent Trials
- Personalized Medicine
- Prometheus
- Reasonable Royalty
- Reexam
- Supreme Court Decisions
- Uncategorized
- USPTO Board Decisions
- USPTO Proposed Rule Changes
- Written Description
Recent Updates
Twitter Updates
@PharmaPatents PharmaPatents' Recent Twitter Posts
- RT @LXBN: Supreme Court Finds For Monsanto In Seed Harvesting Case http://t.co/otl9Pbs0Q2 - @PharmaPatents
(about 2 days ago) - RT @priorsmart: Just read: Supreme Court Finds For Monsanto In Seed Harvesting Case - http://t.co/70U6m8vVvw [at @pharmapatents] #patent
(about 3 days ago) - New article: Supreme Court Finds For Monsanto In Seed Harvesting Case http://t.co/EAntMxrPzV ##patent
(about 3 days ago) - RT @BHoopes_Patents: Still can't believe the #CAFC #CLSBank opinion. A wonderful summary of the madness from @PharmaPatents: http://t.co/40…
(about 4 days ago) - @BHoopes_Patents Thanks!
(about 4 days ago)
