Legal Opinion
Alza Corp. v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, LLC
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided April 26, 2010No. 2009-1350PublishedCited by 71 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PROST, Circuit Judge.
ALZA Corporation and McNeil-PPC, Inc. (collectively, “ALZA”) appeal from a final decision of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Following a bench trial, the district court found the patented treatment methods of U.S. Patent No. 6,919,373 (“'373 patent”) nonobvious, but held the asserted claim both not infringed and invalid for lack of enablement. We affirm because we conclude that the asserted claims of the '373 patent are invalid for lack of enablement.
BACKGROUND
The '373 patent claims methods for treating primarily Attention Deficit and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Hybritech Incorporated v. Monoclonal Antibodies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk, A/s, Novo Nordisk of North America, Inc. And Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- In Re Jack R. Wands, Vincent R. Zurawski, Jr., and Hubert J.P. SchoemakerCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Brenner v. MansonSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by71 opinions
- Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Streck, Inc. v. Research & Diagnostic Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Cephalon, Inc. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
- Wyeth & Cordis Corp. v. Abbott LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
- EMC Corp. v. Pure Storage, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2016
66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.