Pharma & Biotech Global Week in Review 15 June 2011 from IP Think Tank

Here is Think IP Strategy’s weekly selection of top Pharma & Biotech intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet.

 

Highlights this week included:

Supreme Court clarifies ownership rights in federally funded inventions under the Bayh-Dole Act: Stanford v. Roche (Filewrapper) (IPBiz) (Patent Baristas) (Patent Docs) (IPBiz) (Patent Law Center) (IAM) (Patently-O) (Patent Law Practice Center) (IP Spotlight) (Patently-O) (Property, intangible)

 

Please join the discussion by adding your comments on any of these stories, and please do let us know if you think we’ve missed something important, or if there is a source you think should be monitored.

 

General

Big Pharma accepts differential pricing – FINALLY! (Spicy IP)

BIO and PhRMA commend Commerce Secretary for resisting proposed changes to Global Patent System (Patent Docs)

Australia: Therapeutic Goods Legislation Amendment (Copyright) Bill 2011 has commenced! (updated) (IP Whiteboard)

Canada: Study debunks Chamber of Commerce claims on Canadian patent law (Michael Geist)

EU: Opinion of the AG for C-125/10 is out! Merck & Co Inc v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (The SPC blog) (The SPC blog) (The SPC blog)

Monaco: Monaco, France and SPCs (The SPC blog)

US: Supreme Court clarifies ownership rights in federally funded inventions under the Bayh-Dole Act: Stanford v. Roche (Filewrapper) (IPBiz) (Patent Baristas) (Patent Docs) (IPBiz) (Patent Law Center) (IAM) (Patently-O) (Patent Law Practice Center) (IP Spotlight) (Patently-O) (Property, intangible)

US: Joint Statement of BIO, AAU, ACE, APLU, AUTM and COGR says still friends after Stanford v. Roche (Patent Baristas) (Patently BIOtech)

US: They’re at it again… Australian biotech company Genetic Technologies pursues alleged infringers in the US (IP Whiteboard) (Patent Docs)

US: Debunking the myth: Your genes are patented (Patently BIOtech)

US: Debunking the myth: ‘gene patents’ are not necessary for healthcare innovation (Patently BIOtech)

US: Competition regulators continue their campaign against pharmaceutical companies (IP Whiteboard)

US: The Public Patent Foundation takes on agricultural biotechnology: Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association Et al. v. Monsanto (Holman’s Biotech IP Blog)

US: Cardiovascular Biotherapeutics files patent infringement suit against Phage Biotechnology over development of and FDA approval application for wound healing application (Patent Docs)

US: Biota Scientific files for reversal of BPAI decision affirming final rejection of patent entitled ‘Compounds and Compositions for Administration Via Oral Inhalation or Insufflation’ : Biota Scientific Management Pty Ltd. v. Kappos (Patent Docs)

 

Products

Antara (Fenofibrate) US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Lupin Atlantis Holdings S.A. et al. v. Paddock Laboratories, Inc. (Patent Docs)

Avendia (Rosiglitazone maleate) – Israel: Is Smith Kline Beecham’s patent for Rosiglitazone Maleate invalidated by an earlier patent claiming Rosiglitazone and its salts? (IP Factor)

AzaSite (Azithromycin)US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: InSite Vision Inc. et al. v. Sandoz Inc. et al. (Patent Docs)

Azilect (Rasagiline) US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Teva Neuroscience, Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. (Patent Docs)

Detrol LA (Tolterodine) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Pfizer, Inc. et al. v. Impax Laboratories, Inc. (Patent Docs)

Escitalopram – Australia: Patent office grants 121 month extension of time: Alphapharm Pty Ltd & Ors v H. Lundbeck A/S (IP Whiteboard) (Patentology)

Focalin XR (Dexmethylphenidate) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Celgene Corp. et al. v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. (Patent Docs)

Focalin XR (Dexmethylphenidate) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Elan Corp. et al. v. IntelliPharmaCeutics Corp. et al. (Patent Docs)

Gemzar (Gemcitabine) – ALJ Rogers rules on motion to quash in Certain Gemcitabine (337-TA-766) (ITC Law Blog)

Oestrin 24 Fe (Norethindrone acetate, Ethinyl estradiol) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Warner Chilcott Co. v. Mylan, Inc. et al. (Patent Docs)

Oracea (Doxycyline) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Galderma Laboratories Inc. et al. v. Impax Laboratories Inc. (Patent Docs)

Revlimid (Lenalidomide) – Australia: Celgene denied term extension on Revlimid patent (Patentology)

Silenor (Doxepin) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed: Somaxon Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Par Pharmaceutical Inc. et al. (Patent Docs)

Strattera (Atomoxetine)- US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Eli Lilly & Co. v. Hetero Drugs Ltd. et al. (Patent Docs)

Treximet (Sumatriptan, Naproxen) – US: patent infringement complaint filed against Mylan, Ethypharm in response to Para IV certification: Pozen Inc. v. Sun Pharma Global FZE (Patent Docs)

Valcyte (Valganciclovir) – US: patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Genentech, Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. (Patent Docs)

Valsartan – Norway: Oslo District Court : Assessment of infringement to be made as of time of infringement not as of priority date: Novartis v. Actavis (Kluwer Patent Blog)

Viagra (Sildenafil) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Pfizer Inc. et al. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. (Patent Docs)

Xeloda (Capecitabine) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Mylan Inc. et al. (Patent Docs)

Zemplar (Paricalcitol)US: Patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Abbott Laboratories et al. v. Ben Venue Laboratories Inc. (Patent Docs)

Zymar (Gatifloxacin) – US: patent infringement complaint filed in response to Para IV certification: Senju Pharmaceutical Co. et al. v. Lupin Ltd. et al. (Patent Docs)

Discover more from Duncan Bucknell

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading