Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (MNTA)

[biopearl]

This from the article Dew cited:<<The Federal Circuit’s test, now unacceptable, would have found a claim indefinite only if it were “insolubly ambiguous.” In practice, this was a standard that was rarely, if ever, met.>>

This from the Court of Appeals ruling:<<It is undisputed that Group I claims contain an ambiguity because their plain language does not indicate which average molecular weight is intended>>

TEVA uses peak MW in the '808 but average MW in a related patent. This helps to add to the ambiguity according to Sandoz arguments.

So it comes back to what a "person skilled in the art" would interpret the patent(s) to mean. Dr. Grant was TEVAs paid expert and even his testimony had some ambiguities (thanks to mouton for providing the references). The MNTA case remains strong in my (very humble and non legal) opinion. Regards, bp