Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc

I concur in the court’s denial of the petition for rehearing en banc. I write to assuage Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.’s (“BMS”) and the amici’s1 fears that this panel decision has rewritten the test for obviousness for pharmaceutical patents. In my view, the concerns expressed are unjustified and mischaracterize the opinion. This case does not forge new ground or set down immutable principles. It simply decides that, on the record before it, the district court did not err in finding the asserted claim of the '244 Patent invalid as obvious.

As the panel opinion explains, an invention is…