| dc.contributor | 科管智財所 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 陳秉訓 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | Chen, Ping-Hsun | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2020-11 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 25-May-2021 11:14:48 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 25-May-2021 11:14:48 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 25-May-2021 11:14:48 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/135114 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | This article explores Sanofi-Aventis U.S., LLC v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc., 933 F.3d 1367, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and focuses on the issue of nonobviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Federal Circuit has developed the lead compound analysis for determining whether a pharmaceutical compound is obvious in view of a lead compound and other prior art references. The key question is whether an ordinary skilled chemist would have a motivation or reason to select a lead compound and modify it to arrive at the claim compound. The Sanofi-Aventis court further provided an evidentiary rule that the motivation or reason should be based on both the structural similarity of tested prior art compounds and the test results of these compounds. This article argues that the Sanofi-Aventis approach not only follows the Supreme Court’s principles, but also is beneficial to ongoing drug development. | |
| dc.format.extent | 1576906 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law Journal, Vol.20, No.1, pp.1-30 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Obviousness ; lead compound ; pharmaceutical compound ; cabazitaxel ; Jevtana | |
| dc.title (題名) | Nonobviousness Standard for Promoting Ongoing Drug Discovery: A Lesson from Sanofi-Aventis U.S., LLC v. Dr. Reddy`s Laboratories, Inc. | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
