Case Overview: Prometheus Laboratories Inc v Roxane Laboratories
In another case of obviousness coming into the decision in a patent dispute case, Prometheus Laboratories v Roxane Laboratories brings the argument into the pharmaceutical industry. Here, Roxane Laboratories was able to have Prometheus Laboratories' patent invalidated for a "treatment for irritable bowel syndrome" due to prior art and obviousness.
Case Details:
In this dispute, Prometheus Laboratories attempted to seek legal action against Roxane Laboratories for "infringement by planning to produce a generic version of the treatment". Patent Number 6, 284,770 dealing with a drug called alosetron for females with IBS "was rendered obvious by prior art" from "methods of identifying diagnosing IBS" in addition to the connection of alosetron and IBS.
Decision:
Judge Hochberg in a New Jersey court ruled on the case and found that the claims "are nothing more than predictable instructions to doctors on how to treat their patients" and explained that "a gastroenterologist with three years of experience, for example, would be expected to track the latest IBS research -- and that all of the prior art cited in the case comes from that field".
Future Implications:
I found that this case ultimately would be beneficial for individual patients who now have access to a lower costing generic drug. This case represents a key example of how the principles of obviousness found in the Teleflex case can even be applied in the pharmaceutical industry.
Sources:
[1] http://www.law360.com/articles/541268/judge-invalidates-prometheus-patent-for-irritable-bowel-drug
No comments:
Post a Comment