No rehearing in Ranbaxy v. Pfizer

Sun setting on Ranbaxy effort on Lipitor?


The CAFC denied rehearing in Ranbaxy v. Pfizer, AND Pfizer is trying to un-do the damage from the violation of 35 USC 112 paragraph 4.

In a statement on Oct. 23, Pfizer said it plans to go back to the U.S. Patent office [USPTO] to seek to correct a technical defect in a second patent covering the calcium salt of atorvastatin.

**Separately,

in the non-precedential Safeclick v. Visa, issues of local district court rules (on patents) are discussed in the context of a business method patent (5,793,028).

The CAFC cited the ED Texas case Orion v. Staples, 407 F.Supp. 2d 815. Sage Products v. Devon, 126 F.3d 1420, was cited for the proposition that the CAFC does not review that which was not presented to the district court.

The CAFC discussed a make-weight argument by Safeclick.