Sundry Photography / Shutterstock.com
Amgen v Sanofi continues the Federal Circuit’s trend of undermining certain antibody claims, explains Benjamin Pelletier of Haynes and Boone.
A long string of decisions from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has undermined support for purely functional antibody epitope claims through the written description and enablement requirements of 35 USC §112.
The latest chapter in this series of cases, Amgen v Sanofi, Aventisub, issued in February, appears to place the final nail in the coffin of these highly valuable claims.
In Amgen, the patents in suit (US nos 8,829,165 and 8,859,741) are based on Amgen’s discovery that a protein ligand, called PCSK9, binds to and disables low density lipoprotein (LDL, or “bad cholesterol”) receptors, and that this ligand/receptor interaction can be blocked by antibodies that bind to a specific epitope on PCSK9, thereby helping patients achieve better cholesterol levels.
Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review (LSIPR) tracks the increasing challenges for intellectual property specialists in the rapidly evolving world of life sciences. From gene patents to stem cell research, we provide the very best news and analysis.
To continue reading this article and to access 4,500+ articles, our digital magazines and special reports published for LSIPR subscribers only then you will need a subscription.
If you are already subscribed please login.
Official LSIPR subscribers include:
Allen & Overy
Arnold & Siedsma
Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch LLP (BSKB)
Carpmaels & Ransford
European Patent Office
George Washington Law School
Kirkland & Ellis International LLP
Marks & Clerk
NiKang Therapeutics Inc.
Powell Gilbert LLP
Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
World Intellectual Property Office
claims, antibody, antibodies, Amgen, Sanofi, Benjamin Pelletier, Haynes and Boone, patents, suit, epitope, experimentation