Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Intellectual Property Law
(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
Intellectual Property Law
: Intellectual Property LawFederal Circuit Grants Patent Term Extensions
By Sheppard Mullin
In a much anticipated decision, the Federal Circuit held yesterday that two pharmaceutical companies, Wyeth and Elan Pharma, were entitled to extended patent term adjustments because the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office failed to perform a correct calculation of the adjustment. Wyeth v. Kappos, No. 2009-1120 (Fed. Cir.). The decision has broad implications because the incorrect calculations were performed as a result of a flawed interpretation of the patent term adjustment statute, 35 U.S.C. sec. 154(b), that the USPTO was applying to all patentees.
Under section 154(b)(1)(A) (the "A clause"), the USPTO is supposed to extend the term of a patent one day for each day that the USPTO fails to meet certain examination deadlines. Under section 154(b)(1)(B), the USPTO is supposed to extend the term of a patent one day for each day issuance is delayed due to the USPTO's failure to issue a patent within three years after the actual filing date of the application. Section 154(b)(2)(A) provides that, to the extent that periods of delay overlap, the period of any adjustment granted shall not exceed the actual number of days the issuance of the patent was delayed.
Under the USPTO's interpretation of the overlap provision, the overlap between "A" adjustments and "B" adjustments could arise and begin during the first three years of a patent application. The effect of this interpretation was that the USPTO used the greater of the "A" delay and the "B" delay to determine the appropriate adjustment, but never combined the two. Wyeth and Elan disputed this interpretation, arguing that the period of delay for purposes of the B clause could not start until three years after an application's filing date.
The Federal Circuit agreed with Wyeth and Elan, holding that "[b]efore the three-year mark, no 'overlap' can transpire between the A delay and the B delay because the B delay has yet to begin or take any effect." Thus, if a patent application issues three years and thirty days after filing, and thirty days of A delay are incurred before the three-year mark, then the applicant is entitled to a sixty day adjustment.
The Federal Circuit did not indicate whether its holding will have any retroactive effect. Patent applicants who have recently received an issue notification should consider whether to request patent term adjustment in light of Wyeth v. Kappos.
Authored By:
Darren Franklin
(213) 617-5498
DFranklin@sheppardmullin.com
Full post as published by Intellectual Property Law on January 08, 2010 (boomark / email).
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
Federal Adoption Tax Credit
Financial Incentive for Adoptive Parents
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
TEA-21 - Plus Law 105-178
Specialty Lamp International
Recalls Counterfeit Circuit Breakers
Zantac Patent
GlaxoSmithKline and Cypress Pharmaceutical settle patent infringement dispute.
Soliris Patent
Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc. agrees to pay the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation a $10 million patent infringement settlement.
DRAM Patent
ProMOS Technologies and Mosel Vitelic pay MOSAID Technologies an undisclosed patent infringement settlement.
Pesticides
Long-Term Exposure Linked to Diabetes
Long-Term Insurance Suit
Settled for $15 Million

So, How (and When) Will You Get Your Patent Term Adjustment Corrected
Synergy Wont Save Patent Term Extension For Combination of Known Drugs
Extensions of Time in the Fifth Circuit








