Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Patently Obvious
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: Patently ObviousCanadian Supreme Court Confirms Plavix Patent Despite Evergreening Charges
By Dennis Crouch, Esq.
Apotex Inc. v. Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc.,
2008 SCC 61 (Canada Supreme Court 2008)
The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld Sanofi's "selection patent" (the '875 patent) covering the blockbuster anti-clotting drug Plavix. A broader "genus" patent (the '777 patent) ? also held by Sanofi ? discloses over 250,000 different compounds. The narrower patent does have some additional patent scope. In particular, while '875 patent claims a particular dextro-rotatory isomer, the prior '777 patent only describes a racemate of that compound that includes two different isomers.
As an apparent "evergreening" strategy, Sanofi did not claim priority to its earlier patent filing. This allows for an additional decade of patent term. Looking at the case, the Supreme Court determined that it should simply follow the law of novelty and obviousness and not create any special 'evergreening' exception:
[97] Evergreening is a legitimate concern and, depending on the circumstances, strategies that attempt to extend the time limit of exclusivity of a patent may be contrary to the objectives of the Patent Act. The Act aims to promote inventiveness by conferring exclusivity for a limited period of time while providing for public disclosure of the invention to enable others to make or use it after expiry of the period of exclusivity. [98] However, a generalized concern about evergreening is not a justification for an attack on the doctrine of selection patents for two reasons. First, a selection patent may be sought by a party other than the inventor or owner of the original genus patent. In such a case, anticipation or obviousness may be an issue, but evergreening does not arise. |
On obviousness, the court found "a significant difference" between the claimed patent and the prior genus patent, and that the "difference was not obvious."
- Thanks to Professor Jeremy de Beer for sending the case.
Full post as published by Patently Obvious on November 06, 2008 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Canadian Government
allegedly used Canadian soldier as test subjects for nuclear explosion radiation exposure.
Gulf War Syndrome
Panel Confirms it's Real, and Identifies Causes
Zantac Patent
GlaxoSmithKline and Cypress Pharmaceutical settle patent infringement dispute.
Clopidogrel Marketed as Plavix FDA Issues Public Health Advisory
Clopidogrel Marketed as Plavix FDA Issues Public Health Advisory
Plavix and Nexium
A Potentially Dangerous Combination
Soliris Patent
Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc. agrees to pay the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation a $10 million patent infringement settlement.
#1 Online Legal Resource
On 08-25 at 15:46PM
Acute perpendicular parking #NYPD #NYFD
On 08-18 at 22:18PM
Parallel parking gone bad. Too much gas UES NYC
On 08-18 at 21:41PM
UES NYC
On 08-18 at 21:25PM
Twitter suspends journalist critical of broadcast partner's coverage on dubious grounds @guyadams #nbcfail #twitterfail
On 07-30 at 17:57PM
Model example of 1st Amendment suppression by the People of New York City's Michael Bloomberg #OWS #NYPD
On 07-12 at 21:07PM
AG Holder lackadaisical on Operation in our Sites domain name seizures & RIAA lobbied free speech suppression @dajaz1
On 06-08 at 22:44PM
Why is the Catholic Church going to court over Obama contraception policy? @NewYorker commentary
On 05-31 at 10:08AM
Monks sue Louisiana for right to sell caskets made from forrest destroyed by Katrina
On 05-31 at 07:47AM
Are the abortion ultrasound laws headed for the Supreme Court?
On 05-15 at 21:52PM
Court Declares That Plavix Patent Is Teflon
Sanofi wins over Apotex in PLAVIX battle in Canada
Apotex Sues FDA to Recover 180-Day Exclusivity on Generic Plavix
Federal Circuit rejects challenge to the validity of the patent for the drug Plavix
BMS Executive Faces Criminal Charges in Connection With Plavix
Stopping Plavix May Cause More Blood Clots
The Supreme Court Takes the Plunge On A Patent Case - Again
US Supreme Court Expands Rights of Patent Licensees by Extending Patent Exhaustion Doctrine
Welcome to Texas: Keep Your Powder Dry
 |
|
Contact Us | About Us | Celebrity Law Blog |
Our Partners | Disclaimer
| Law Blog Directory
| Law Jobs
| Law Tweets
| Oil Spill Video
All original material © 1999-2011 by USLaw.com. All other material, including Blog Directory feed content, are © by their respective copyright holders. |