The patent owner appealed the decisions of the district court rejecting the patent owner’s arguments that the PTO erred in calculating its patent term extension. Specifically, the patent owner argued that the district court erred when it determined: (1) that the PTO’s denial of administrative relief on Daiichi’s requests for reconsideration of the patent term adjustments as being outside the 180-day limit was not contrary to law, arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion under the APA; (2) that the 180-day limitations period applies to final patent term adjustment determinations; and (3) that 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(4)(A) is not subject to equitable tolling. The Federal Circuit rejected each argument.
Daiichi Sankyo Company v. Lee, Case No. 2014-1280 (July 2, 2015); Opinion by: Reyna, joined by Moore and Taranto; Appealed From: District Court for the District of Columbia, Roberts, J. Read the full opinion here.
