Post-Trial Finding Of Non-Obviousness Issues

Morris James LLP
Contact

Bayer Pharma AG, et al. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 12-517 - GMS, April 27, 2016.

Sleet, J. Court finds the ‘950 patent-in-suit is not obvious and declines to award attorneys fees.

A 6-day bench trial was held from April 6-14, 2015. The court considers post-trial findings of fact and conclusions of law relating to validity of U.S. Patent No. 8,613,950 challenged by defendant on the basis of obviousness. The asserted claims cover orally disintegrating tablet formulations of vardenafil hydrochloride trihydrate. The court finds that a POSA would recognize concerns of increased bioavailability and taste over a delayed release ODT formulation, teaching away from the claimed subject matter. It further rejects the defendant’s argument that a POSA would find it obvious to use mannitol and sorbitol in an ODT.  Although defendants have not established a prima facie case of obviousness, the secondary, objective indicia point towards a finding of non-obviousness. Defendants’ request for attorneys fees is denied.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morris James LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Morris James LLP
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Morris James LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide