"MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. subsequently filed a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court in August of this year, arguing that there is "doctrinal chaos" surrounding the topic of after-arising technology in the context of patent infringement suits. While some Federal Circuit decisions have held "that when a patentee secures a claim construction that ensnares, as infringing, an accused device that features after-arising technology, the patentee risks invalidating its own patent on written-description and enablement grounds,""
""The CAFC ultimately found that Novartis' patent's lack of description for a complexed form of valsartan and sacubitril 'does not affect the validity of the patent' because that complex, which wasn't discovered until four years after the priority date of the '659 patent, is not what was claimed." The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied certiorari to MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.,"
MSN Pharmaceuticals sought Supreme Court review after the CAFC reversed a district court finding that certain claims of Novartis' Entresto patent lacked written description. The CAFC affirmed that those claims were not invalid for obviousness, lack of enablement, or indefiniteness. The CAFC concluded that omission of a description for a valsartan–sacubitril complex discovered four years after the priority date did not affect patent validity because the complex was not claimed. The Supreme Court denied certiorari, leaving the CAFC decision and its treatment of after-arising technology in infringement suits in place.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]