Tag Archives: Momenta

Termination Of Product Development Precludes Standing To Appeal PTAB IPR Decision Upholding Patent

In Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Meyers Squibb Co., the Federal Circuit issued another decision analyzing the contours of a petitioner’s Article III standing to appeal PTAB decisions upholding a patent. In contrast to Amerigen, where the court found standing for a would-be generic competitor whose ANDA was subject to a Paragraph III certification against the … Continue reading this entry

Federal Circuit Interprets Two Important Infringement Provisions

In a single decision issued for companion cases Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. and Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Federal Circuit interpreted two important sections of the infringement statute, 35 USC § 271. In one portion of its decision, the court adopted a literal interpretation of § 271(g), holding that the statute only … Continue reading this entry

Federal Circuit Finds "Molecular Weight" To Be Insolubly Ambiguous

Please welcome Daniel Shelton, an associate in the Chemical, Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Practice of Foley & Lardner LLP, as a new author for PharmaPatentsBlog. In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit invalidated a number of claims directed to a polymer defined by its “molecular weight” because the term was ambiguous, and … Continue reading this entry

Federal Circuit Extends Safe Harbor To Post-Approval Drug Testing

In a decision issued August 3, 2012 in Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the safe harbor provisions of 35 USC § 271(e)(1) can shield the defendants from liability for patent infringement arising out of their use of patented methods to satisfy FDA testing requirements for their approved products. … Continue reading this entry