In a patent case that could change the way drug companies enter into licensing agreements, the Supreme Court this week ruled that biotech firm MedImmune may sue its licensing partner Genentech. There will be little impact on collaborative deals, in which the licensor and licensee work together to bring a drug to market, but when a company wants to protect itself against infringement -- as in the MedImmune case -- licenses will likely contain language that terminates a license if a licensee files suit.
January 12, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
In a patent case that could change the way drug companies enter into licensing agreements, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that biotech firm MedImmune Inc. may sue its licensing partner Genentech Inc. over one of the most famous patents in biotech.
The court’s 8-1 decision Tuesday — only Justice Clarence Thomas dissented — reversed several lower court rulings that said MedImmune couldn’t pay license fees on a patent and sue to have the patent overturned at the same time.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
