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.
Capabilities
Suggested News & Insights
Sidley 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, 2026Managing IP Recognizes Sidley and 12 Lawyers in IP Stars 2026July 31, 2026Sidley Shortlisted in 16 Categories at the LMG Life Sciences Americas Awards 2026July 20, 2026The Future Of WDTX Patent Litigation After Judge AlbrightJune 26, 2026Nat Love to Speak at 2026 Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA) Bench & Bar® ConferenceThursday, June 18, 2026
- Stay Up To DateSubscribe to Sidley Publications
- Follow Sidley on Social MediaSocial Media Directory