Legal Opinion · Dissent

Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Actavis LLC

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided May 3, 2019No. 2018-1054Published

1DissentStoll, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent. The FDA set a regulatory requirement that ABUK content in oxymorphone products be less than 0.001% (10 ppm). Mallinckrodt then claimed this requirement in the '779 patent. Not only does the FDA's mandate disclose every limitation of claim 1, but it is the only prior art reference that discloses the 0.001% oxymorphone ABUK limitation. Compare J.A. 2736, 2895, with '779 patent col. 37 ll. 58-59. Yet, the district court determined that this mandate did not disclose "anything substantive *1379relevant to obviousness." Endo Pharm. Inc. v. Actavis Inc. , No. CV-14-1381, 2017 WL…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Intelligent Bio-Systems, Inc. v. Illumina Cambridge Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
  3. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Twi Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
  4. Ucb, Inc. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API