Pfizer v. Teva Pharmaceuticals (quinapril案件)

mp3: http://www.patentpod.com/sound/2006/january/Pfizer-v-Teva-Pharmaceuticals.mp3

 

pdf: http://www.patentpod.com/library/2006/january/Pfizer-v-Teva-Pharmaceuticals.pdf

 

 

取自 http://www.podcastingnews.com/details/feeds.feedburner.com/patentpod/view.htm

 

Pfizer (Warner-Lambert) seeks construction of the claim term "saccharides" that includes polysaccharides, such that Warner-Lambert's generic version of their patented pharmaceutical compositions commonly used to treat high-blood pressure. The C.A.F.C. sites Philips for the proposition that a "person of ordinary skill in the art is deemed to read the claim term not only in the context of the particular claim in which the disputed term appears, but in the context of the entire patent, including the specification." The specification included a section entitled "saccharides," which includes substances compatible with the alkali or alkaline earth metal-containing stabilizers, preferably mannitol, lactose, and other sugars. Since each of these preferences have less than ten monosaccharide units, Teva (Ranbaxy) argues that saccharides should not include polysaccharides. The C.A.F.C. found that the specification enabled the claim language "saccharides" to include "polysaccharides."