the firm's post-grant practitioners are some of the most experienced in the country.

Technologies

Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Digital Health
Digital Health
Energy & Renewables
Energy & Renewables

Fast Facts

About Our

Law Firm

About Our Law Firm

Headquartered within steps of the USPTO with an affiliate office in Tokyo, Oblon is one of the largest law firms in the United States focused exclusively on intellectual property law.

Get to know our

History

Get to know our History

1968
Norman Oblon with Stanley Fisher and Marvin Spivak launched what was to become Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP, one of the nation's leading full-service intellectual property law firms.

Our Local and

Global Reach

Our Local and Global Reach

Outside the US, we service companies based in Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, and farther corners of the world. Our culturally aware attorneys speak many languages, including Japanese, French, German, Mandarin, Korean, Russian, Arabic, Farsi, Chinese.

A few of our

ACCOLADES

A few of our ACCOLADES

Oblon's professionals provide industry-leading IP legal services to many of the world's most admired innovators and brands.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUR

Career

OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUR Career

From the minute you walk through our doors, you'll become a valuable part of a team that fosters a culture of innovation, client service and collegiality.

A few ways to

GET In Touch

A few ways to GET In Touch
US Office

Telephone: 703-413-3000
Learn More +


Tokyo Office

Telephone: +81-3-6212-0550
Learn More +

Downloadable

Patent Forms

Downloadable Patent Forms

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued final rules implementing the inventor's oath or declaration provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA) on August 14, 2012.

Stay informed with

Our Blogs

Fair Prescription Drug Competition Act

  • March 1, 2011
  • Blog Post

Associated Technologies


The Senate and House of Representatives are both considering bills that would prevent NDA holders from marketing authorized generic versions of their drug during a generic manufacturer’s 180-day exclusivity. The nearly-identical bills, S.373 and H.R.741, concern any version of an NDA holder’s drug that the NDA holder introduces on the market after receiving notice of a pending ANDA with a Paragraph IV certification alleging invalidity or noninfringement. An exception in the bill would allow an NDA holder some involvement in the release of an authorized generic drug if the first ANDA filer, eligible for 180-day exclusivity, would be marketing, selling, or distributing the drug. After the 180-day exclusivity period concludes, or after the first ANDA filer forfeits the exclusivity period, the NDA holder could again introduce new versions of the drug.

If this new measure becomes law, it would give first-filing ANDA applicants a 180-day period to start competing with the NDA holder in which even the NDA holder could not introduce a new version of the drug. The exclusive nature of this half-year right to introduce new versions would increase the incentive for potential ANDA filers to challenge patent validity or scope. With no new NDA holder competition, an ANDA filer may introduce its generic product at a price equal to or only slightly lower than the NDA holder’s brand price. Thus, this bill would incentivize patent challenges at some expense to generic drug consumers, both monetarily and regarding variety of generic drug options. However, consumers might also see earlier initial introduction of generic drugs. The bill would disadvantage NDA holders, both in increased patent challenges and in missed opportunity to establish a position in the generic market. First-filing ANDA applicants would realize greater profits in exchange for their patent challenges.