Legal Opinion
Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Doll
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided April 10, 2009No. 2008-1131PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by the court filed by Circuit Judge RADER. Opinion concurring-in-part and dissenting-in-part filed by Circuit Judge SCHALL.
RADER, Circuit Judge.
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia held that later developments in the art may inform the “pat-entably distinct” determination for double patenting. Double patenting doctrines and case law permit this court to agree in part, but only to the extent that the subsequent developments predate the secondary application that triggers a double patenting rejection. Because genuine issues of fact cloud the date of availability…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- National Cable Television Association, Inc. v. American Cinema Editors, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Nicholas v. Perricone, M.D. v. Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation, Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- In Re Robert Goodman, Vic C. Knauf, Catherine M. Houch and Luca ComaiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Darrel A. Mazzari, and Michael T. Sheedy v. James E. Rogan, Director, Patent and Trademark OfficeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- In re Teles AG InformationstechnologienCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Beres v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp v. Breckenridge PharmaceuticalCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018
- Seven Resorts, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.