Skip to content

Organic Patents®

A WordPress site dedicated to Patents and Organic Chemistry

  • Home
  • About
  • Enablement
  • Obviousness
    • Cases from the CAFC & PTAB on Small-Molecule Obviousness
    • Obviousness of Chemical Processes
    • Obviousness of Stereoisomers & Purified Compounds
  • Patent Eligibility
  • DISCLAIMER
  • Boilerplate Definitions

Juxtapid® Patents Survive IPR Challenge

March 6, 2017

Coalition for Affordable Drugs VIII LLC v. The Trustees of The University of Pennsylvania, IPR2015-01835 &  IPR2015-01836

Links to PDFs of Final Decisions:

https://ptabdata.uspto.gov/ptab-api/documents/646278/native

https://ptabdata.uspto.gov/ptab-api/documents/646276/native

Lomitapide (Juxtapid®)

Patexia Blog Post:

https://www.patexia.com/feed/the-university-of-pennsylvania-overcomes-kyle-bass-s-obviousness-challenge-to-juxtapid-patent-claims-using-commercial-success-20170307

 

 

Share:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • For Fellow Coffee Lovers: PTAB Denies Keurig’s IPR Petition Against Touch Coffee
    Date
    January 5, 2017
    In relation to
    Case Law
  • Steadymed wins IPR Challenge of United Therapeutics’s Remodulin® Product-by-Process Patent Claims
    Date
    April 18, 2017
    In relation to
    Case Law
  • PTAB Denies Amneal’s Request to Institute IPR Against Hospira’s Dexmedetomidine Pharmaceutical Composition Patent
    Date
    February 6, 2017
    In relation to
    Case Law
This entry was posted in Case Law and tagged Case Law, FINAL WRITTEN DECISION, IPR, Juxtapid, PTAB, University of Pennsylvania on March 9, 2017 by David Rucando.

Post navigation

← A Lot of Excitement About the CRISPR Interference, or Rather Lack Thereof Patents Directed to Deuterium-Modified Drugs →

Links

  • ACS-Chemistry & The Law
  • US Patent & Trademark Office
  • Patently-O
  • PatentDocs
  • PharmaPatents Blog

Recent Posts

  • SCHRÖDINGER’S POLYMORPH: WHEN A CRYSTALLINE FORM CLAIM IS OBVIOUS AND INVALID
  • NESACS Advances in Chemical Sciences Symposium
  • 10-Month Rule: Federally Funded Provisional Patent Applications
  • Inherency & Therapeutic Mechanisms: Reviewing In re Couvaras – (With No-Frills Diagrams)

Archives

Categories

  • Case Law
  • Chemistry
  • Deals
  • Education
  • Fun Facts
  • FYI
  • Interesting Patents
  • Patent Prosecution
  • SCOTUS
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • Uncategorized
  • USPTO

Contact

david@organicpatents.com

Proudly powered by WordPress
Exit mobile version