ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Orange Book Blog: At the Intersection of Patent Law and FDA Law

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Intellectual Property Law

: Orange Book Blog: At the Intersection of Patent Law and FDA Law

Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidity of Bayer Patent on Yasmin

By Aaron Barkoff

ADVERTISEMENTS

Bayer Schering v. Barr Labs, No. 2008-1282 (Fed. Cir. 2009)

A divided panel of the Federal Circuit today affirmed a district court decision holding Bayer's U.S. Patent No. 6,787,531 invalid due to obviousness.  The '531 patent, which claims pharmaceutical compositions of drospirenone and ethinyl estradiol, protects Bayer's popular birth-control pill Yasmin.  In today's decision, the majority (Judges Mayer and Friedman) held that "the invention would have been obvious to try."  Judge Newman dissented.

Drospirenone is an acid-sensitive and poorly soluble compound.  The use of drospirenone with ethinyl estradiol was known in the prior art, but, according to Bayer, formulations of micronized drospirenone in a normal (not enteric coated pill) would not have been obvious, especially since the prior art taught that an enteric coating is necessary to protect drospirenone from the acidic environment of the stomach.

The majority, however, disagreed.  Citing KSR, the majority stated that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have chosen

between two known options:  delivery of micronized drospirenone by a normal pill . . . or delivery of drospirenone by an enteric-coated pill . . . .  This is a finite number of identifed, predictable solutions.  The prior art would have funneled the formulator toward these two options; he would not have been required to try all possibilities in a field unreduced by the prior art . . . .

In dissent, Judge Newman argued that the actual experience of the Bayer scientists should be dispositive.  They testified, without contradiction, "that it was not reasonably expected that uncoated micronized drospirenone would be 99+% effective as an oral contraceptive when ingested into the acid stomach, when it was known to degrade rapidly in acid."  According to Judge Newman, "the exercise of judicial expertise to override the clear evidence of how persons of skill in this field actually behaved, is inappropriate."

RELATED READING:

Full post as published by Orange Book Blog: At the Intersection of Patent Law and FDA Law on August 06, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0134 secs (new cache)