News & Analysis as of

Patent Litigation Indefiniteness Life Sciences

Goodwin

The Appeals Review Panel’s In Re Xencor Decision: The USPTO Provides Its Position on Written Description and Means-Plus-Function...

Goodwin on

On May 17, 2024, an Appeals Review Panel (ARP) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) released its decision in Ex parte Chamberlain (referred to in Federal Circuit proceedings as In re Xencor;...more

Goodwin

Janssen v. Teva: Not an April Fool’s Day Joke for Life Sciences Companies

Goodwin on

On April 1, 2024 the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., affirming the district court’s finding that certain claims were not indefinite and...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 18-cv-734, 2021 WL 5323737 (D.N.J. Nov. 16, 2021) (Cecchi, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Invega Sustenna® (paliperidone palmitate); U.S. Patent No....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Lessons for Life Science and Medical Device Companies Post-Nautilus

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Under the U.S. Patent laws, claims must particularly point out and distinctly claim what the inventor understands her invention to be. Up until three years ago, the inquiry for determining indefiniteness was to ask whether...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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.
- hide
- hide