While predicting a Supreme Court decision is never a safe bet, the oral argument in Bowman v. Monsanto suggests that the result will be welcome news for companies patenting self-replicating technology (like the biotechnology industry). On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument on Bowman v. Monsanto, which we told you about on February 12. The…
On February 11, 2013, the District Court of Delaware ruled that U.S. Patent No. 5,206,244 patent to entecavir (the active ingredient in Bristol-Myers Squibb’s Baraclude, which treats hepatitis B viral infections) is invalid for obviousness. This case marks the first instance where a court has invalidated a molecule patent based on obviousness. The lead compound…
A recent case is a reminder of a claim construction lesson that all litigants should keep in mind. Last Friday, Novartis AG’s Alcon Inc. subsidiary asked the Supreme Court to reverse a Federal Circuit decision in favor of Apotex relating to Alcon’s Patanol (olopatadine) ophthalmic formulation. The case is interesting because of its unusual procedural…
A Supreme Court patent exhaustion case could affect biopharmaceuticals. Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Bowman v. Monsanto Co. (Docket No. 11-796), a case that may narrow patentees’ rights in self-replicating technologies. The self-replicating technology at issue in Bowman is genetically modified seeds, but it is not difficult to imagine broader implications…