Clearing the patent pathways (Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics v AbbVie Biotechnology)

Published on: 28 October 2016

Published by: LexisPSL

Clearing the patent pathways (Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics v AbbVie Biotechnology)
Original news
What are the practical implications of this decision for IP&IT lawyers?
Does this decision further extend the application of Arrow declarations for divisional patent applications both in respect of patents families in which there is a granted patent at the date proceedings are issued (the first FKB action) and in which there is no granted patent (the second FKB action to which the latest decision relates)?
What are the implications of the decision on the clearing the way doctrine? Will generics now be required to clear the way in respect of pending applications by way of Arrow declarations as well as granted patents by way of traditional revocation proceedings?
What does this decision tell us about the weight the court gives to a patentee's patent prosecution strategy?

Article summary

IP & IT analysis: AbbVie is the proprietor of a large portfolio of patents and patent applications protecting the drug, Humira (adalimumab). The product patent for Humira, including its supplementary protection certificate (SPC), is due to expire on 15 October 2018. The decision in Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Company Ltd v AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd, concerned Fujifilm’s patent dispute with two AbbVie entities regarding the bringing to market of a biosimilar product once the SPC had expired. Annsley Merelle Ward, associate and intellectual property (IP) litigator for Bristows LLP, comments on the implications of the case for IP lawyers. Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.