List of expiration dating of drug patents

07-Dec-2017 03:39

For example, an applicant's patent A expires on December 24, 2000.

The applicant filed another patent application two years later.

In 2007, Protonix earned Pfizer more than

For example, an applicant's patent A expires on December 24, 2000.The applicant filed another patent application two years later.In 2007, Protonix earned Pfizer more than $1.9 billion, but these revenues had fallen to $480 million by 2010.This reduction in profit was, in part, a result of the launch of generic versions of pantoprazole by Teva and Sun Pharmaceuticals in 20.In a pharmaceutical patent dispute, Teva argued that Wyeth’s patent on zaleplon drug products (Sonata) had expired because of a terminal disclaimer. The district court found the language of the statute unambiguous and gives the court "no discretion".

||

For example, an applicant's patent A expires on December 24, 2000.

The applicant filed another patent application two years later.

In 2007, Protonix earned Pfizer more than $1.9 billion, but these revenues had fallen to $480 million by 2010.

This reduction in profit was, in part, a result of the launch of generic versions of pantoprazole by Teva and Sun Pharmaceuticals in 20.

In a pharmaceutical patent dispute, Teva argued that Wyeth’s patent on zaleplon drug products (Sonata) had expired because of a terminal disclaimer. The district court found the language of the statute unambiguous and gives the court "no discretion".

.9 billion, but these revenues had fallen to 0 million by 2010.

This reduction in profit was, in part, a result of the launch of generic versions of pantoprazole by Teva and Sun Pharmaceuticals in 20.

In a pharmaceutical patent dispute, Teva argued that Wyeth’s patent on zaleplon drug products (Sonata) had expired because of a terminal disclaimer. The district court found the language of the statute unambiguous and gives the court "no discretion".

S., since the patent term now depends on the priority date, not the issue date.Design patents have a shorter term than utility patents.Design patents filed on or after May 13, 2015 have a term of 15 years from issuance.Teva's motion to dismiss was consequently denied because "a terminally disclaimed patent is eligible for extension under [Section] 156." The case is interesting because the patentee in the first instance had expressly disclaimed term subsequent to 2003 to get the patent granted. There is now a similar case wherein a company was given extension under S.156 and the generic entrant arguing against such extension between Merck and Hi-tech for a drug called "dorzolamide" (TRUSOPT/COSOPT).However, the holding of this case does not apply to Patent Term Adjustment granted under 35 U. Here too, the first company (Merck) had filed a standard form terminal disclaimer. ruled that patents extended under Hatch-Waxman are still eligible to URAA term extension.

S., since the patent term now depends on the priority date, not the issue date.

Design patents have a shorter term than utility patents.

Design patents filed on or after May 13, 2015 have a term of 15 years from issuance.

Teva's motion to dismiss was consequently denied because "a terminally disclaimed patent is eligible for extension under [Section] 156." The case is interesting because the patentee in the first instance had expressly disclaimed term subsequent to 2003 to get the patent granted. There is now a similar case wherein a company was given extension under S.156 and the generic entrant arguing against such extension between Merck and Hi-tech for a drug called "dorzolamide" (TRUSOPT/COSOPT).

However, the holding of this case does not apply to Patent Term Adjustment granted under 35 U. Here too, the first company (Merck) had filed a standard form terminal disclaimer. ruled that patents extended under Hatch-Waxman are still eligible to URAA term extension.

This patent was later given an extension and became the crux of the litigation. However, patents in force on June 8, 1995 solely because of the Hatch-Waxman term adjustment are not eligible.