As we’ve reported on previously, Allergan, Inc. assigned its rights to patents covering its Restasis® dry eye treatment to the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe (“Tribe”) and simultaneously licensed back those patents in exchange for the Tribe’s agreement to invoke tribal sovereign immunity in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the…
The PTAB has denied institution of inter partes review of two Abbvie patents that relate to HUMIRA (adalimumab). On February 9, 2018, the PTAB denied Sandoz’s IPR2017-01824 on U.S. Patent No. 9,512,216, which is directed to a method of treating plaque psoriasis by subcutaneously administering a claimed regimen of adalimumab. On the same day, the PTAB…
On January 8, 2018, the Federal Circuit issued its en banc decision in Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., No. 2015-1944. The Federal Circuit originally held that due to binding precedent, a time-bar determination under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) is final and nonappealable under 35 U.S.C. § 314(d). As we reported here,…
Yesterday, in Ericsson Inc. v. Regents of the University of Minnesota, an expanded 7-judge PTAB panel ruled that a patent owner waives a claim to sovereign immunity in an IPR “by filing an action in federal court alleging infringement of the patent being challenged in [the IPR] proceeding.” The PTAB…
Coherus Biosciences has filed two petitions for inter partes review of Abbvie’s U.S. Patent 9,085,619. (IPR2017-01008 and IPR2017-01009). Coherus recently filed four other petitions for inter partes review of the ‘619 patent, as we’ve reported. Those cases are pending an institution decision. According to the petitions, the ‘619 patent is drawn…
We post frequently about IPRs here on the blog, because they are an efficient and relatively quick way to get a decision on validity of the patents that cover drugs, biologic or otherwise. In Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.p.A., the Supreme Court denied certiorari after the Federal Circuit affirmed that the standard…
Although we typically focus our posts on biosimilar-specific issues, we wanted to highlight a recent IPR-related filing that is likely of interest to many of our readers. <p=>The scope of estoppel that attaches to a petitioner (and petitioner’s privies and all real parties in interest) in a later district court litigation under…
Law360 has published an article by contributing editors here at Big Molecule Watch. The article, titled “IPR Estoppel Takes Shape,” looks at recent cases that discuss the scope of estoppel stemming from inter partes review proceedings. Click here for a link to the article.
If you plan to attend next week’s 2016 BIO Intellectual Property Counsels Committee Fall Conference, please keep an eye out for members of the Big Molecule Watch team. Big Molecule Watch editor Cynthia Hardman will moderate the conversation during the day-two luncheon fireside chat, “Standing on the Front Lines: Trials…
The Federal Circuit will rehear en banc the appeal In re: Aqua Products, Inc., No. 2015-1177 to address whether the PTAB’s rules requiring the Patent Owner to demonstrate the patentability of proposed amended claims are consistent with the statute permitting claim amendment during an IPR challenge, 35 U.S.C. 316(d) and (e). A…