HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SUPPORT WLF

Case Detail


Pfizer v. Apotex Corp.
On October 1, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order declining to review an appeals court decision that undercuts patent rights by defining far too broadly the circumstances under which a patent can be invalidated on the basis of obviousness. The decision was a setback for WLF, which filed a brief urging that review be granted. WLF argued that a newly-created drug should not be deemed non-patentable on obviousness grounds simply because it is not shown to be more effective than pre-existing drugs that are chemically similar. WLF argued that when, as here, a new drug exhibits improved properties (e.g., superior stability, solubility, and stickiness properties) that would not have been obvious to trained chemists, the new drug is patentable regardless that it does not provide improved clinical effectiveness. WLF argued that the decision below, if allowed to stand, will throw into question the validity of a wide range of pharmaceutical patents.
Case Status:
Certiorari denied.
More Information and Downloads:
6/29/2007: Download the Brief

  • Welcome to the Washington Legal Foundation
  • 2009 Massachusetts Ave., NW
    Washington, DC 20036
  • info@wlf.org  |  ph. 202-588-0302
    ©2017 WLF All Rights Reserved