Law360
Defending ‘Salt’ Patents In Hatch-Waxman Cases
December 1, 2015
After Pfizer Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 480 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2007), reh’g denied, 488 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (“Norvasc decision”), there was an apparent drop in cases involving salt patents, i.e., which claim a particular salt form of a drug. However, several recent cases have upheld salt patents, and this article will discuss potential responses to some common challenges, namely a Petering anticipation challenge, and a KSR obvious-to-try challenge.
得意分野
Suggested News & Insights
22 Sidley Lawyers Named to 2027 Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in AmericaSeptember 11, 2026Sidley Represents Enbridge in US$2.55 Billion Acquisition of Tallgrass’ Crude Transportation BusinessSeptember 10, 2026Current AI Usage Rules in the Most Popular Patent Infringement Case VenuesSeptember 9, 2026Chambers Releases AI & Intellectual Property 2026 Global Practice Guide Featuring Insights from SidleySeptember 2026Sidley Wins Finance “Litigation Department of the Year” and Earns Multiple Honors at the Texas Legal Awards 2026August 5, 2026Courts Set Clear Standards for How Lawyers Use AI in LitigationJuly 31, 2026
- Stay Up To DateSubscribe to Sidley Publications
- Follow Sidley on Social MediaSocial Media Directory