Download Brochure

Please complete the information below to complete your download.

Please note: That all fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.

First Name *
Last Name *
Job Title *
Company Name *
Email Address *
Telephone *
Country *
Where did you hear about us? *

I would like to receive information about sponsorship and exhibition opportunities

Yes, sign me up for the FREE Pharma IQ e-newsletter, including information on FREE Podcasts, Webinars, event discounts and online learning opportunities.



U.S. Judicial Decisions Impacting Co-Crystal Patent Strategy

Posted: 08/25/2010




To continue viewing this content please fill out the form below and become an IQ member.
Or if you're already a Pharma IQ member, sign in to continue.

First Name*
Last Name*
Job Title*
Company*
Country
State
E-mail*
Username*
Password*
Confirm Password*

By clicking Submit, you accept our User Agreement, Privacy Policy, and Cookie Policy.
Tags:  Jeffrey Lindeman | patent strategies | co-crystal patents | co-crystals | crystalline forms | IP strategies | IP strategies for crystalline forms | co-crystal patentability | pharmaceutical co-crystals | patent considerations | enantiomers | salt forms

Want to design and implement effective patent strategies for co-crystal patents? In this presentation, decisions suggesting how US courts may view co-crystal patents, including analysis of Abbott v. Sandoz (Fed. Cir. 2009),  Sanofi-Synthelabo v. Apotex (Fed. Cir . 2008), and Pfizer v. Apotex (Fed. Cir. 2007). 

Presented Dr. Jeffrey A. Lindeman, Member, O’Brien Jones PLLC, at IQPC's Pharmaceutical Co-Crystals 2009.






comments powered by Disqus


Advertise With Us

Join the Pharmas IQ Community