David P. Langlois (DL 2319) SUTHERLAND ... - FDA Law Blog

Case 1:09-cv-04665-DLC Document 49-2 Filed 03/30/2010 Page 21 of 45TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSEUpon information and belief, the claims of the ‘043 patent are invalid for failure to complywith the requirements of the patent laws of the United States, including, without limitation, 35U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112.ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSEUpon information and belief, the claims of the ‘090 patent are invalid for failure to complywith the requirements of the patent laws of the United States, including, without limitation, 35U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112.TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSEUpon information and belief, the claims of the ‘205 patent are invalid for failure to complywith the requirements of the patent laws of the United States, including, without limitation, 35U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112.THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSEUpon information and belief, the claims of the ‘243 patent are invalid for failure to complywith the requirements of the patent laws of the United States, including, without limitation, 35U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112.FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSEUpon information and belief, the claims of the ‘640 patent are invalid for failure to complywith the requirements of the patent laws of the United States, including, without limitation, 35U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and/or 112. Without limiting the foregoing, upon further information andbelief, the claims of the ‘640 patent are invalid due to nonstatutory double patenting.9067383.120