Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.

726 F.3d 1286 (Fed. Cir. 2013)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.

2 Citing cases

  1. Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. v. Roxane Labs., Inc.

    Civil Action No. 14-882-LPS (CONSOLIDATED) (D. Del. Mar. 31, 2017)   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Rather, a POSA need only have a "reasonable expectation of success in developing [the claimed invention]." Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 726 F.3d 1286, 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Here, the patentee broadly claimed the use of 4-AP to achieve blood levels having any "therapeutic effect."

  2. Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc.

    Civil Action No. 09-750-RGA (D. Del. Mar. 31, 2014)   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding the limitation of the “Asp9 impurity level below 0.6%” of the '727 patent claims met by defendant's ANDA specification which sought approval for drug product with Asp9 impurity levels up to 1.0%, noting “the fact that the ANDA application includes Asp9–bivalirudin levels above 0.6%, and at some point Hospira might make a batch with levels above 0.6%, does not negate a finding of infringement”

    To prove obviousness, Defendants must show that a person skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the claimed combinations with a reasonable expectation of success. Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., 726 F.3d 1286, 1291 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Evidence of obviousness, especially when that evidence is proffered in support of an "obvious-to-try" theory, is insufficient unless it indicates that the possible options skilled artisans would have encountered were "finite," "small," or "easily traversed," and that skilled artisans would have had a reason to select the route that produced the claimed invention.