Life Sciences Patent Litigation – Leveraging Key Recent Decisions from the Courts and the PTAB
Streams live on
Life sciences patent litigation has witnessed numerous precedential changes in the last few years affecting every aspect of the field, from patent eligibility (on which the pendulum may be swinging back towards innovators) to enablement and obviousness (on which the pendulum may be swinging away from the same folks) and infringement liability. In this program, patent attorney Aaron Pereira will do a quick and deep dive into some key decisions from the federal courts and the PTAB in the life sciences space, with a focus on what the decisions really mean – how they impact the industry and your ability to protect, challenge and litigate life sciences innovations.
This program is geared towards in-house and outside IP counsel but should benefit anyone with an interest in emerging issues in the life sciences space.
Review the courts' evolving views on § 112 enablement (Amgen v. Sanofi) and its impact on prosecuting and litigating genus and functional claims in life sciences patents
Pursue or avoid infringement liability for generic and follow-on drug products based on: 1) So-called "skinny labels" (GSK v. Teva), 2) Pre-approval commercial manufacturing (Amgen v. Hospira), and 3) Divided or induced divided infringement (Sanofi v. Watson Labs, Eli Lilly v. Parenteral Medicines, etc.)
Analyze and litigate patent claims on diagnostics and methods of treatment based on recent surprisingly pro-patentee decisions from the Federal Circuit (Illumina v. Ariosa, Vanda, etc.)
Gain access to this course, plus unlimited access to 1,700+ courses, with an Unlimited Subscription.Explore Lawline Subscriptions