Obviousness of Biologics Inventions: Strategies for Biologics Claims in the U.S., Europe and China

Recording of a 90-minute CLE webinar with Q&A


Conducted on Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Program Materials

This CLE webinar will provide guidance to patent counsel on overcoming the challenges of obviousness in biologics patent claims in the U.S., Europe and China. The panel will examine the similarities and differences between claim types that have the best chance of success. The panel will also discuss recent case law and key issues that arise.

Description

Eight of the top ten best selling drugs last year were biologics. Unsurprisingly, patents relating to new biologics products are often challenged in patent offices and courts around the world, as well as the PTAB. At a time when global litigation is the norm, it is important to understand and coordinate strategies around the world.

In the U.S., there is an abundance of decisions on written description, but only a handful of Federal Circuit cases address the obviousness of inventions related to biologics. Further, with the advent of IPR, over 200 petitions have been filed at the PTAB alleging biologic claims are not patentable under §103.

In Europe, the European Patent Office has been accused of being inconsistent in its treatment of biologics, with patents for new antibody products being particularly challenging. Also, China has seen rapid growth as a destination for biologics patents.

Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys provides an in-depth analysis of biologic IPR petitions. The panel will review the similarities and differences between biologic claim types that have the best chance of success in the U.S., China and Europe, and the obviousness issues that may arise. The panel will also review current EPO and China practice, discuss recent case law and outline key issues that arise. The panel will offer guidance addressing obviousness issues in biologics inventions.

READ MORE

Outline

  1. U.S.
    1. PTAB treatment
    2. Court treatment
    3. Strategies for overcoming obviousness challenges
  2. Europe
    1. EPO treatment
    2. Court treatment
    3. Strategies for overcoming obviousness challenges
  3. China
    1. Agency treatment
    2. Court treatment
    3. Strategies for overcoming obviousness challenges

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • What evidence should counsel provide to support its assertion of nonobviousness in biologics patents?
  • How can counsel overcome the inconsistency in the EPO’s treatment of biologics patents?
  • How can patent counsel guide applicants during patent application drafting to reduce the likelihood of rejection?

Faculty

Diner, Bryan
Bryan C. Diner

Partner
Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

Mr. Diner practices all aspects of intellectual property law, including strategic patent portfolio management,...  |  Read More

Feng, Amy
Amy Feng

Partner
Wu Feng & Zhang

Ms. Feng focuses her practice on biotech and pharma patent, chemical engineering, material, and chemistry. She handles...  |  Read More

Ford, Hazel
Dr. Hazel Ford

Partner
Finnegan Europe

Dr. Ford has extensive experience drafting and prosecuting patent applications at the European Patent Office (EPO) and...  |  Read More

Mouta-Bellum, Carla
Carla Mouta-Bellum, Ph.D.

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

Dr. Mouta-Bellum focuses on drafting and prosecuting patent applications in the fields of biotechnology and...  |  Read More

Other Formats
— Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include program handouts. To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video

$297

Download

$297