Blog

The Federal Circuit Panel's April 16, 2026 decision in Teva v. Eli Lilly reinstates a $176.5M verdict and draws a clear distinction under §112 between method-of-treatment and composition claims. The decision highlights the importance of  drafting choices, like those made by Teva 2006.

Teva shows how much §112 outcomes turn on drafting choices rather than the volume of disclosure. From a specification describing a single humanized antibody, the patentee framed the invention as a method of treatment, anchored the genus to a known biological target, and relied on humanization as routine art within the POSA's knowledge. These are structural choices, made years before litigation, that shape how a patent reads in enforcement decades later.

These choices are exactly what purpose-built tools like Solve Intelligence are designed to surface early on, during drafting, when they can be considered consciously and proactively. The alternative may be that issues only become apparent during litigation, when it is often too late to change a decision that was made previously, whether intentionally or not.

Key takeaways

• Teva v. Eli Lilly (Fed. Cir. Apr. 16, 2026) marks the first clear limit on Amgen v. Sanofi.
• Amgen's §112 calculus does not extend to method-of-treatment claims reciting an antibody genus.
• Same specification, same genus, yet the antibody claims failed in IPR while the headache claims won at trial.
• One humanized antibody, a known biological target, and routine humanization techniques were enough to satisfy §112.
• Four drafting choices won the case: claim category, functional anchoring, routine art, one embodiment.
• Teva is a re-opening event for life sciences portfolios with genus claims.

Last week, we shared how Solve Intelligence is powered by Claude across our platform, from patent application drafting to office action responses and claim chart generation. We’re now taking the next step: bringing the patent expertise of Solve Intelligence directly into Claude through our new MCP server, available from today.

Solve Intelligence has acquired ClaimWise, an AI start-up for European patent attorneys. With the acquisition of ClaimWise, Solve Intelligence is bolstering its support for European prosecution, opposition and litigation workflows, cementing its place as the go-to AI platform for European patent practice.

ClaimWise is our second acquisition this year, following Palito earlier in 2026. With this acquisition, Solve Intelligence now serves over 600 firms and in-house teams.

The leading in-house and outside counsel life sciences patent teams have voted Solve Intelligence as the winner of the Technology Solution of the Year Award at the 2026 Life Sciences Patent Network (LSPN) Spring Meeting in Boston, recognising our impact on the way life sciences and chemistry IP teams draft, prosecute, and analyse patents.

The American Bar Association’s Intellectual Property Law Section Spring Conference (ABA-IPL) remains one of the premier annual gatherings for IP professionals, bringing together practitioners, in-house counsel, academics, and policymakers to explore the latest developments shaping the field. 

Solve Intelligence was invited not only to attend, but to share their expertise on the concluding panel as leaders in AI.

Sughrue Mion has always set the standard for what patent prosecution looks like. Founded in 1957, the firm has obtained more U.S. patents than any other law firm in the world. That record is built on deep technical expertise, disciplined prosecution strategy, and a culture that takes the quality of every work product seriously.

When Sughrue decided to integrate AI into patent workflows for select clients, their approach reflected that culture. Sughrue thoughtfully structured its implementation, and demonstrated a clear vision of where technology and AI adds value and where attorney judgment remains irreplaceable.

Key Insights

• Sughrue adopted Solve Intelligence's platform for certain clients across Drafting, Prosecution, and Charts following firm-wide testing, culminating in an enterprise partnership.
• The rollout was driven by Firm leadership prioritising practitioner education and a structured implementation framework from day one.
• Solve Intelligence is now integrated into numerous preparation and prosecution workflows, helping Sughrue's attorneys work faster, think more expansively, and deliver higher-quality outcomes for a global client base.

At Solve Intelligence, we believe the future of intellectual property belongs to professionals who can combine deep legal expertise with the most capable AI available. That's why our platform is powered by Claude, and why we're expanding what's possible for patent professionals and inventors worldwide.

Preliminary injunctions, or “provisional measures” in Unified Patent Court (UPC) terminology, have become the most consequential procedural tool in European patent litigation. In under three years, the UPC has issued 63 decisions across 88 cases, with filings accelerating year on year. The analytical rigour courts demand has increased at precisely the moment timelines have compressed.

For patent teams on both sides, the procedural reality is stark: court-ready claim analysis that once took months must now be produced in days, at a depth that no longer rewards manual workflows.

Tools like Solve Intelligence’s Charts are emerging as a response to that structural pressure, compressing the mechanical phases of claim charting while preserving the practitioner-led judgment that courts expect.