Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 26 JANUARY 2017

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - January 2017

WilmerHale
WilmerHale
Contributor
WilmerHale

WilmerHale

WilmerHale's London office was established more than 40 years ago. With lawyers qualified in the...

View firm profile
Explore more from WilmerHale

Prost, C. J. Affirming judgment of induced infringement by an ANDA and no invalidity for indefiniteness, obviousness, or obviousness—type double patenting.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Eli Lilly and Company v. Teva Parenteral Medicines (No. 2015-2067, 1/12/17) (Prost, Newman, Dyk)

January 12, 2017 4:32 PM

Prost, C. J. Affirming judgment of induced infringement by an ANDA and no invalidity for indefiniteness, obviousness, or obviousness—type double patenting. "Depending on the clarity of the [proposed drug label] instructions, the decision to continue seeking FDA approval of those instructions may be sufficient evidence of specific intent to induce infringement. ...Conversely, 'vague' instructions that require one to 'look outside the label to understand the alleged implicit encouragement' do not, without more, induce infringement." "[E]vidence that the product labeling that Defendants seek would inevitably lead some physicians to infringe [the method claims] establishes the requisite intent for inducement."

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from