Insights
Search Results
Alerts
5.07.26
Federal Circuit Provides Path to Written Description and Enablement for Patents Related to Methods of Using a Well-Known Class of Molecules
On April 16, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the court) issued a precedential decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH v. Eli Lily and Company, determining that the claims of Teva’s U.S. Patent Nos. 8,586,045 (the ’045 patent), 9,884,907 (the ’907 patent), and 9,884,908 (the ’908 patent) (collectively, the Headache Patents) relating to methods of reducing headache by administration of humanized anti-CGRP antagonist antibodies are not invalid for lack of written description or enablement. The decision reversed a district court’s judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) decision concluding otherwise, and reinstated the jury’s findings that Eli Lilly’s Emgality® product willfully infringed the Headache Patents.
News Articles
3.20.26
Jad Mills, Richard Torczon Appointed to PTAB Bar Leadership
On March 20, 2026, Wilson Sonsini partner Jad Mills was elected to the board of directors of the PTAB Bar Association and senior counsel Richard Torczon was appointed to Chair of the organization’s Trials Committee. The PTAB Bar Association is committed to preserving and promoting the professional and ethical standards of lawyers and stakeholders who appear before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
News Articles
2.17.26
WIPR Recognizes Wilson Sonsini in USA Patent Rankings 2025
World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR) recognized Wilson Sonsini’s patents practice in the 2025 edition of “WIPR USA Patents,” a comprehensive analysis of the leading law firms and attorneys in the U.S. Wilson Sonsini is ranked as a “Recommended Firm” and is noted for its patent work and for its bench of deeply knowledgeable practitioners. The firm is also recognized for its work in cutting-edge technology sectors, including artificial intelligence and machine learning.
Client Highlights
12.02.25
Wilson Sonsini Secures PTAB Institution in Five IPRs Filed for Azurity Pharmaceuticals
On November 19, 2025, Wilson Sonsini obtained a significant milestone for Azurity Pharmaceuticals, with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituting inter partes review in all five petitions the firm filed on Azurity’s behalf. The petitions challenge methods and compositions for treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The Board’s institution decisions found a reasonable likelihood that Azurity will prevail on at least one challenged claim in each proceeding and authorized full trials on the grounds raised. The Board’s decisions are a notable milestone in the current PTAB environment, where institution rates have tightened significantly. Three Administrative Patent Judges independently concluded the challenges were reasonably likely to succeed, and the cases will now proceed to the yearlong trial phase.
Client Highlights
10.01.25
Wilson Sonsini Defends Win in Xarelto Appeal
On September 23, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) holding key patent claims covering Bayer's Xarelto product unpatentable. Wilson Sonsini represented Mylan Pharmaceuticals in the challenge before the PTAB and at the Federal Circuit.
Client Highlights
6.24.25
Wilson Sonsini Convinces Federal Circuit to Vacate and Remand Adverse PTAB Decision
On June 20, 2025, Wilson Sonsini obtained a significant Federal Circuit victory on behalf of Mylan. A team of the firm’s patent litigators successfully appealed an adverse decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concerning a foundational patent protecting the brand product Trulance®. In a unanimous panel opinion, the Federal Circuit vacated the adverse decision and remanded the case to the PTAB.
Alerts
6.12.25
Patent Office Denial of “Late” Inter Partes Review Petitions Changes Expectations
On June 6, 2025, the acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a decision in iRhythm Technologies v. Welch Allyn, Inc.1 that initiates a new basis for discretionary denial of inter partes review (IPR) petitions. The Director denied institution of iRhythm’s IPR petitions because iRhythm had upset Welch Allyn’s settled expectations in the enjoyment of its patents. iRhythm is the first such IPR discretionary denial and raises questions about the scope of this new doctrine and its congruence with judicial and congressional developments.
Alerts
8.21.24
Federal Circuit Provides Guidance on What Claims Can Properly Serve As Obviousness-Type Double Patenting References
In a precedential decision issued on August 13, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a first-filed, first-issued, later-expiring claim cannot be invalidated by a later-filed, later-issued, earlier-expiring reference claim having a common priority date.1
Alerts
7.01.24
U.S. Supreme Court Administrative Law Decisions Raise Questions for U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Proceedings
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two important administrative law cases that are expected to increase judicial authority over agency adjudications and rulemaking. In Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy (decided June 27), the Court held that when the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) seeks civil penalties for securities fraud, the defendant is entitled to a jury trial. In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (decided June 28), the Court held that courts should not defer to an agency statutory interpretation. While each ruling might have significant effects on some agencies, their effect on the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) should be much more limited because, generally, USPTO regulatory authorities are much more limited and because USPTO’s primary reviewing court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, is a specialized court that does not defer to USPTO on legal questions.