Fed. Circ. Provides Clarity On Patent Term Questions
By Irena Royzman and Andrew Cohen ( December 11, 2018, 3:39 PM EST) -- In two decisions on Dec. 7, the Federal Circuit clarified the law of obviousness-type double patenting, or ODP, and provided certainty to biopharmaceutical patent owners. In Novartis AG v. Ezra Ventures LLC, the court held that ODP does not invalidate an otherwise valid patent term extension, or PTE, granted under 35 U.S.C. § 156 (extending the term of a pharmaceutical patent to compensate for regulatory delays). And in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical Inc., the court clarified that its holding in Gilead Sciences Inc. v. Natco Pharma Ltd.[1] i.e., that a later-issuing, earlier-expiring patent can invalidate an earlier-issuing, later-expiring patent for ODP, applies only to post-Uruguay Round Agreements Act, or URAA, patents. Under Breckenridge, where a later patent expires earlier only because of the URAA's change in patent term, the post-URAA patent is not an ODP reference against the pre-URAA patent. The two decisions put an end to post-Gilead ODP challenges to pre-URAA patents and patents with PTE based on term granted by Congress....
¼«ËÙÈü³µ is on it, so you are, too.
A ¼«ËÙÈü³µ subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.
A ¼«ËÙÈü³µ subscription includes features such as
Daily newsletters
Expert analysis
Mobile app
Advanced search
Judge information
Real-time alerts
450K+ searchable archived articles
And more!
Experience ¼«ËÙÈü³µ today with a free 7-day trial.