![]() Under the bargain, the government grants an inventor a monopoly in the form of a patent. Patent attorneys love to talk about the quid pro quo of patents. On Monday the justices will analyze whether Amgen’s broad patent satisfies that rule. One of the rules for a valid patent is that it must enable others to make and use the invention. ![]() However, the patent also goes far beyond those 26 examples, covering any antibody within the broad genus. The patent gives details for 26 example antibodies and specifies how to run further processes to identify others from a pool of potentially thousands or even millions of candidates. In other words, the patent covers a genus defined by how the antibodies work. Instead, this case involves a broader patent Amgen obtained, which covers any monoclonal antibody that binds to particular sweet spots on the PCSK9 protein and blocks that protein from binding to LDL receptors. Those narrow patents are not in dispute here. The antibodies work by binding to a particular protein in the body (PCSK9), which then blocks that protein from destroying receptors that extract cholesterol from the bloodstream.Īmgen and other companies already have patents covering particular antibodies defined by their amino acid sequences. ![]() Sanofi, the justices will consider whether Amgen’s patent is too broad to be valid under federal patent rules.Īmgen has patents on monoclonal antibodies that lower LDL, or “bad,” cholesterol. Two pharmaceutical giants head to the Supreme Court on Monday in a dispute over a patent covering cholesterol-lowering antibodies.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |