![Product-by-Process Claims Invalid when the Process Does Not Impart Structural or Functional Differences, <i>PTAB Litigation Blog</i>](/-/media/images/publications/2017/05/productbyprocess-claims-invalid-when-the-process-d/extensionceogimageoverride/product-by-process.jpeg?rev=fda44158f4714f17bf49d5436f90d0e3&sc_lang=en&la=en&h=675&w=1080&hash=95384DDAF104FC94A98934FB015A2F54)
Product-by-Process Claims Invalid when the Process Does Not Impart Structural or Functional Differences, PTAB Litigation Blog
Visit the Jones Day PTAB Litigation Blog.
The PTAB issued a final written decision in IPR2016-00006, holding claims 1–22 of U.S. Patent No. 8,497,393 ("the ’393 patent") unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). All of the claims are product-by-process claims to prostacyclin derivatives including treprostinil, the active ingredient in the pulmonary arterial hypertension drug Remodulin®.
Read the full article at ptablitigationblog.com.