Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 OCTOBER 2016

Final Judgment Prescribed For Antibody Patent After Double Patenting Decision

Proskauer Rose LLP
Proskauer Rose LLP
Contributor
Proskauer Rose LLP

Proskauer Rose LLP

Firm Overview Proskauer is an elite global law firm with more than 900 lawyers across key financial...

View firm profile
Explore more from Proskauer Rose LLP

We previously wrote about Judge Wolf's decision to invalidate Janssen Biotech, Inc.'s biopharmaceutical patent (U.S. Patent No. 6,284,471 ), based on the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting.

United StatesIntellectual Property

We previously wrote about Judge Wolf's decision to invalidate Janssen Biotech, Inc.'s ("Janssen") biopharmaceutical patent (U.S. Patent No. 6,284,471 (the "'471 Patent")), based on the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting.

Celltrion Healthcare Co. Inc. ("Celltrion") subsequently moved the court for an entry of final judgment dismissing Janssen's infringement claims premised on the '471 Patent. While Celltrion's request may seem straightforward given that the court invalidated the '471 Patent, it was not a guarantee. Other claims still remain in the case, and under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), the court "may" enter a final judgment dismissing less than all claims in the action only if it determines "that there is no just reason for delay."

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