The “Lilly decision” gives drugmakers a first glimpse of how the courts will interpret a law designed to exclude nonUS infringement on US patents.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
35 U.S.C. §271(g) states, in pertinent part: (g) Whoever without authority imports into the US or offers to sell, sells, or uses within the US a product which is made by a process patented in the US shall be liable as an infringer, if the importation, offer to sell, sale, or use of the product occurs during the term of such process patent. A product which is made by a patented process will, for purposes of this title, not be considered to be so made after—(1) it is materially changed by subsequent processes.
38 USPQ2d 1705 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
35 U.S.C. §§101–103.
35 U.S.C. §271.
S. Rep. No. 83,100th Cong. 1 st Sess. 46 (1987).
US Patent No. 4,160,085, entitled “Cyclization to Form Cephem Ring and Intermediates Therefor”.
S. Rep. No. 83,100th Cong. 1 st Sess. (1987).
S. Rep. No. 83,100th Cong. 1 st Sess. 50 (1987).
38 USPQ2d at 1706–1707.
38USPQ2d at 1709.
35 U.S.C. §251.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tsao, R., Hurley, E. Beyond the letter of the law: The US Federal Circuit interprets §271 (g)(1). Nat Biotechnol 15, 86–87 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0197-86
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0197-86
