Inevitable Does Not Equal Obvious

Earlier this week, the Unites States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) held that the United States District Court for the District of Delaware clearly erred in its obviousness analysis in Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc, reversing the lower court’s decision and entering judgment in favor of Millennium. Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Millennium”) […]

Inflammatory Post

Federal Circuit: The difference between substantial cure and full cure is not insubstantial

In a decision yesterday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgment of anticipation and obviousness. While the court disagreed with the district court's conclusion that the prior art expressly anticipated the asserted claims as a matter of law, the court did conclude that the prior art inherently disclosed the relevant limitations as a […]

Federal Circuit panel splits on inherency case

In a second appeal involving patents relating to the original "Purple Pill®," a panel of the Federal Circuit split on whether an earlier patent application by a Korean company inherently anticipated one of AstraZeneca's patents covering the popular heartburn medication Prilosec® (omeprazole). The panel majority held that a process disclosed in a Korean patent application […]