Amy Mahan, PhD
Subscribe to Amy Mahan, PhD's PostsAmy Mahan focuses her practice on intellectual property matters in the life sciences, pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. She works on a variety of patent infringement litigation cases involving monoclonal antibody biologics, cell-based immunotherapies and small molecule drugs. Read Amy Mahan's full bio.
2020 IP Law Year in Review: Patents
By Amol Parikh, Cecilia Choy, Amy Mahan, PhD, Hala Mourad, Colin J. Stalter and Elizabeth Teter on Jan 28, 2021
Posted In Patents
Executive Summary In 2020, the US Supreme Court and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit continued to refine key aspects of intellectual property law on issues that will have an impact on litigation, patent prosecution and business strategy. This Special Report discusses some of the most important decisions. The Federal Circuit issued several panel...
Continue Reading
Product-by-Process Analysis Applies to Method of Treatment Claims
By Amy Mahan, PhD on Oct 8, 2020
Posted In Patents
In a case relating to use of recombinant human interferon-β (IFN-β) proteins for the treatment of viral diseases, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that a “product-by-process” analysis applies even when the product-by-process limitation is nested within a method of treatment claim. Biogen MA Inc. v. EMD Serono, Inc., et al.,...
Continue Reading
Unlikely to Succeed: Preliminary Injunction Denied Despite Stipulation to Irreparable Harm
By Amy Mahan, PhD on Aug 13, 2020
Posted In Patents
In a dispute over the terms of a settlement agreement, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a patent owner was not entitled to a preliminary injunction despite a stipulation that it would be irreparably harmed if the accused infringer breached certain provisions of the agreement. Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v....
Continue Reading
Patent Term Extension Only Applies to Approved Product
By Amy Mahan, PhD on May 7, 2020
Posted In Patents
In a case relating to a patented method for treating multiple sclerosis, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that patent term extension (PTE) only applies to methods of using the approved product as defined under the relevant statute, 35 U.S.C. § 156, even if the patent claim is broad enough to...
Continue Reading
Stated Purpose More Decisive than Definition in Construing Claims
By Amy Mahan, PhD on Mar 25, 2020
Posted In Patents
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) obviousness decision, finding the decision was infected by an erroneous claim construction that failed to consider the purpose of the claimed invention. Kaken Pharmaceutical Co., LTD v. Iancu, Case No. 18-2232 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13 2020)(Taranto, J.). Kaken...
Continue Reading
Choosing Advocacy over Candor Renders Patent Unenforceable
By Amy Mahan, PhD on Mar 19, 2020
Posted In Patents
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s finding that the patents-in-suit were unenforceable due to inequitable conduct because of a failure to disclose information related to an offer for sale of the claimed invention made more than one year prior to the critical date. GS Cleantech Corp v Adkins...
Continue Reading
Room Temp Prior Art Has Chilling Effect on Broadening Claim Language
By Amy Mahan, PhD on Jan 22, 2020
Posted In Patents
In a case involving a patented method for purifying antibodies, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that the process of chilling a composition to below room temperature could be found both obvious and anticipated by a process that purified that composition at room temperature. Genentech, Inc. v. Hospira, Inc., Case No....
Continue Reading
