Bayer Pharma Ag v. Watson Laboratories, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, Circuit Judge.
Watson Laboratories, Inc. appeals the District of Delaware’s final judgment holding Wat$on failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that claims 9 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 8,613,950 (“the ’950 patent”) would have been obvious. We hold the district court clearly erred in finding a skilled artisan would not have been motivated to use the claim elements. Considering the district court’s clear error together with the remainder of its fact findings, we conclude that claims 9 and 11 of the ’950 patent would have been obvious. We therefore reverse.
Background
In 2003, the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Pfizer, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Medichem, S.A. v. Rolabo, S.L.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2024
- Chemours Company Fc, LLC v. Daikin Industries, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2021
- Exeltis USA, Inc. v. Lupin Ltd.District Court, D. Delaware · 2024
- Forest Laboratories LLC v. Sigmapharm Laboratories LLCDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2020
- In Re: MezaCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.