Legal Opinion
Merck & Cie v. Watson Laboratories, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided May 13, 2016No. 2015-2063, 2015-2064PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MAYER, Circuit Judge.
Watson Laboratories, Inc. (‘Watson”) appeals the final judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware holding that claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 6,441,168 (the “'168 patent”) is not invalid under the on-sale bar of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (2006). 1 See Merck & Cie v. Watson Labs., Inc., 125 F.Supp.3d 503 (D.Del.2015) (“District Court Decision”). For the reasons discussed below, we reverse.
BACKGROUND
A. The '168 Patent
Claim 4, the sole asserted claim of the '168 patent, is directed to a crystalline calcium salt of a tetrahydrofolie acid (“MTHF”). Claim 4…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- John Cucuras and Maria Cucuras, Parents and Next Friends of Nicole Cucuras v. Secretary of the Department of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Elizabeth v. Pavement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Allen Engineering Corporation v. Bartell Industries, Inc. And Darragh CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Inline Packaging, LLC v. Graphic Packaging, Int'lCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2020
- Polara Engineering, Inc. v. Campbell Co.District Court, S.D. California · 2017
- Crane Security Technologies, Inc. v. Rolling Optics, ABDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2017
- Junker v. Medical Components, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2022
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.