Immunex Corp. v. Sandoz Inc.

 
APPEAL NO.
20-1037
OP. BELOW
DCT
OPINION
TBD
SUBJECT
Patent
AUTHOR
TBD

Issue(s) Presented

1. “Whether the patents-in-suit are invalid for [obviousness-type double patenting], where Immunex— which owns all substantial rights in those patents, including the ability to control patent prosecution—had already obtained earlier-expiring patents claiming obvious variants of the same inventions.” 2. “Whether the claims-in-suit are invalid for lack of written description, where the original specification did not disclose the key claimed features of etanercept and Immunex had to amend the specification to add them.” 3. “Whether the district court’s ruling on obviousness was infected by legal error.”