Yetter Coleman recently filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in MSN Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., representing nine professors of intellectual property law in support of MSN’s petition for certiorari.
The brief addresses unresolved inconsistencies in how courts interpret patent claim scope for after-arising technologies—a critical question for both innovation and legal certainty.
The professors’ brief provides historical and policy context and urges the Court to clarify whether patent claims should have consistent scope for both infringement and validity, especially as technology evolves. Only clear standards can restore predictability and fairness to the patent system.
In a recently published Law360 article, Yetter Coleman IP practice leader, Jeff Andrews says, “The case squarely presents an important question of patent law, not just pharmaceuticals: can a patentee rely on a broad reading to prove infringement, yet avoid the corresponding disclosure obligations for validity?” He further adds, “The court’s guidance on claim scope symmetry would benefit every technology sector.”
Click to read the amicus brief in full
Author: Yetter Coleman LLP, on behalf of intellectual property law professors.