Friday the 13th may have been The Medicines Company’s lucky day, since the Federal Circuit granted its petition for rehearing en banc in The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc. In the court’s original decision, which I discussed in this article, the court found that the use of a contract manufacturer gave rise to an on … Continue reading this entry
Tags: Hospira, On-Sale Bar, The Medicines Company
In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a transaction with a contract manufacturer gave rise to an on sale bar that invalidated The Medicines Company’s Angiomax® patents. Are the facts of this case unusual, or does this decision put other pharmaceutical patents at risk? Would the on sale bar of … Continue reading this entry
Tags: Hospira, On-Sale Bar, The Medicines Company
The House patent reform bill (HR 1249) that was passed last week includes a provision that impacts the deadline for filing an application for patent term extension under 35 USC § 156 after receiving FDA approval for a patented product. Although the House provision addresses the issue before the district court in The Medicines Co. … Continue reading this entry
Tags: 156, America Invents Act, HR 1249, Patent Reform, Patent Term Extension, S 23, The Medicines Company
In a decision that sent The Medicines Company’s stock prices soaring, the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia determined that the USPTO’s rejection of The Medicines Company’s application for Patent Term Extension was based on an incorrect—and unreasonable and unfair —interpretation of the governing statute. The patent at issue relates to Angiomax®, an … Continue reading this entry
Tags: Angiomax, PTE, The Medicines Company
Posted in 102; Federal Circuit Decisions