On December 1, 2017, several friends of the PTAB submitted amicus curiae briefs in connection with the Tribe’s motion to dismiss the pending IPRs challenging Allergan’s Restasis® patents. What did the amici argue, on both sides of the issue?
Read MoreThe Supreme Court has heard oral argument in Oil States v. Greene’s Energy, and a decision whether IPRs are unconstitutional is currently pending. For companies currently embroiled in IPRs that could directly impact their bottom line, the Supreme Court’s decision could be very tangible. AbbVie ($ABBV) and Coherus Biosciences ($CHRS) are a case in point.
Read MoreIn the course of eviscerating IPRs through Oil States, pharma could theoretically open the door to jury trials for its patents. That may not be a good thing for branded pharma.
Read MoreViewed through that lens, the Respondents argue there is nothing unconstitutional about IPRs. Congress was expressly given the power to grant patents within the Constitution. Congress has delegated that power to a federal agency, namely, the USPTO. Any “right” to a patent therefore derives directly from a Federal Government action, and by that token, it is a public right. In other words, patents do not embody a natural right of the inventor to exclude others from using his or her invention. Rather, a patent only exists because Congress has expressly provided for it.
Read More