RE41,148 ("Oral pulsed dose drug delivery system," issued February 23, 2010) claims a multiple pulsed dose drug delivery system for pharmaceutically active amphetamine salts, comprising an immediate-release component and an enteric delayed-release component. Petitioner Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. is challenging the '148 patent on three grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (ground 1) or obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 2 and 3). View the petition here.

Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 8,791,154 ("High concentration olopatadine ophthalmic composition," issued July 29, 2014) claims an ophthalmic aqueous solution containing relatively high concentrations of olopatadine solubilized within the solution where the composition is preferably capable of providing enhanced relief from symptoms of ocular allergic conjunctivitis, particularly late phase symptoms of ocular allergic conjunctivitis. Petitioners Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. are challenging the '154 patent on two grounds as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). View the petition here.

8. Petitioners Mylan N.V., Biocon Research Ltd., and Biocon Ltd. are challenging the '652 patent on six grounds as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). View the petition here.

Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 8,822,438 ("Methods and compositions for treating cancer," issued February 11, 2014) claims methods for treating cancer comprising administering a 17α-hydroxylase/C17,20-lyase inhibitor, such as abiraterone acetate (i.e., 3β-acetoxy-17-(3-pyridyl)androsta-5,16-diene), in combination with at least one additional therapeutic agent such as an anti-cancer agent or a steroid. Petitioners Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC, Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Inc., Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Ltd., Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries, Ltd., Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries, Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., West-Ward Pharmaceutical Corp., and Hikma Pharmaceuticals, LLC are challenging the '438 patent on two grounds as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). View the petition here.

Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 6,612,985 ("Method and system for monitoring and treating a patient," issued September 2, 2003) claims a method for tracking compliance with treatment guidelines as well as a system for tracking compliance in treating patients comprising an assessment processing system. Petitioners McKesson Corp., McKesson Technologies Inc., InTouch Technologies, Inc., and Medical Depot, Inc. are challenging the '985 patent on nine grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (grounds 1, 6, and 8) or as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 2-5, 7, and 9). View the petition here.

Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 8,822,438 ("Methods and compositions for treating cancer," issued September 2, 2014) claims methods for treating cancer comprise administering a 17α-hydroxylase/C17,20-lyase inhibitor, such as abiraterone acetate (i.e., 3β-acetoxy-17-(3-pyridyl)androsta-5,16-diene), in combination with at least one additional therapeutic agent such as an anti-cancer agent or a steroid. Petitioner Argentum Pharmaceuticals Inc. is challenging the '438 patent on two grounds as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). View the petition here.

Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 7,682,612 ("Treatment of hematologic malignancies associated with circulating tumor cells using chimeric anti-CD20 antibody," issued March 23, 2010) claims a method of treating chronic lymphocytic leukemia in a human patient, comprising administering an anti-CD20 antibody to the patient in an amount effective to treat the chronic lymphocytic leukemia, wherein the method does not include treatment with a radiolabeled anti-CD20 antibody. Petitioners Celltrion, Inc., Celltrion Healthcare Co. Ltd., and Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH are challenging the '612 patent on five grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (ground 3) and as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 1, 2, 4, and 5). View the petition here.

Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 6,685,730 ("Optically-absorbing nanoparticles for enhanced tissue repair," issued February 3, 2004) claims methods involving localized induction of hyperthermia in tissue or materials by delivering nanoparticles to the tissue or materials and exposing the nanoparticles to an excitation source under conditions wherein they emit heat and the use thereof for the repair of tissue. Petitioner Sienna Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. is challenging the '730 patent on six grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (grounds 1, 2, and 3) or obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 4, 5, and 6). View the petition here.

Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 6,440,706 ("Digital amplification," issued August 27, 2002) claims a method for determining the ratio of a selected genetic sequence in a population of genetic sequences. Petitioners Myriad Genetics, Inc.; Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc.; Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.; and RainDance Technologies, Inc. are challenging the '706 patent on six grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (grounds 1 and 4) or obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 2, 3, 5, and 6). View the petition here.

exposed portion of the interconnected group of blood vessels with a source of illumination, thus causing the dye to emit radiation; (c) capturing the radiation emitted by the fluorescent dye with a camera capable of imaging a series of angiographic images within the vessel graft and said exposed portion of the interconnected group of blood vessels, the images including at least an image of a fluorescent wavefront corresponding to an interface between the flowing blood that first contains the fluorescent dye introduced, such image being captured by the camera as the fluorescent wavefront transitions through the exposed vessel graft and interconnected croup of blood vessels; and (d) evaluating the angiographic images to assess blood flow through the vessel graft relative to blood flow through the interconnected group of blood vessels. Petitioner Visionsense Corp. is challenging the '190 patent on four grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (ground 1) or as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 2, 3, and 4). View the petition here.