Product-by-process claims are product claims
This is being published with the permission of Kawaguti & Partners. K&P’s Court Decision Report in 2015 <<<Special News Flash>>> Supreme Court Overturns Grand Panel’s...
View ArticleAriosa v. Sequenom – Novel Genetic Analysis Fails The Mayo Test
Today, the Fed. Cir. affirmed the district court’s holding that the method for detecting paternally inherited nucleic acid of fetal origin in a sample of the mother’s blood was a patent-ineligible...
View Article“If Wishes Were Horses”– Roberts’ Dissent from Myriad
After reading Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S.___(2015), (a copy is found at the end of this post) I was struck by Justice Robert’s dissent – which excoriates the majority for legislating from the bench...
View ArticleIn re Cuozzo – Still no changes for the claim interpretation standard during...
A guest post from Theresa Stadheim, attorney at Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner. In In re: Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC, Appeal No. 2014-1301 (Fed. Cir. July 8, 2015, decision by Dyk), the Federal...
View ArticlePatent Office Publishes Subject Matter “Update”
Today (July 30th), the Patent Office released an 11 page “July 2015 Update” on patent-eligible subject matter (or not). (A copy of the update and appendices can be found at the end of this post.) Most...
View ArticleEisenberg Analyzes the 101 Exception for Patents Claiming Diagnostic
PatentlyO recently posted a nearly final draft of a paper writer by Professor Rebecca Eisenberg that will be published in the Journal of Science and Technology Law (note to author – fix fn 23). (A copy...
View ArticleFed. Cir. Rules Requirements for Direct Infringement by Multiple Parties
CAFC Decides Akamai v Limelight–Holds For Infringement By Limelight–Defines Criteria For Directing And Controlling Customers’ Performance In Akami Technologies v. Limelight Networks, App. No....
View ArticleSequenom’s En Banc Petition
Sequenom’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc – Panel Ignored “Inventive Concept” in Combined Steps of the Claimed Method For any of us practitioners encountering increasing numbers of s. 101 rejection...
View ArticleAnother Claim Bites the Dust left by Teva v. Sandoz
Although the jury found the claims valid, and the Fed. Cir. affirmed, this decision, which found that the claims were not insolubly ambiguous, was revisited by the Fed. Cir. While there are pages on...
View ArticleShire v. Amneal Pharma – Adjusting the Rearview Mirror
While the IP law world is being rocked by new developments in biosimilars, patent-eligible subject matter and IPR’s, it is almost refreshing to see a decision upholding the validity of claims to a...
View ArticlePhysiology/Medicine Nobels Awarded for Discoveries of “Natural Products”
In re Roslin Institute, a Fed. Cir. panel consisting of Judges Dyk, Moore and Wallach ruled that clones including Dolly the sheep were not patent eligible. Judge Dyk, writing for the panel endorsed the...
View ArticleUSPTO Report on State of Confirmatory Genetic Testing Comes off the Waffle Iron
In 2011—after the Fed. Cir. decision in Myriad upholding claims to BRACA1 and 2 genes—the PTO was tasked by a section of the AIA with providing Congress with a report on the effect of patenting on...
View ArticleJanice Mueller’s New Article: Patent -Ineligible Methods of Treatment
Patent-Ineligible Methods of Treatment Janice M. Mueller Chisum Patent Academy October 3, 2015 Janice M. Mueller, Patent-Ineligible Methods of Treatment, in MUELLER ON PATENT LAW, VOL. I...
View ArticlePrometheus v. Roxane – A Glimpse of Christmas Future?
A Fed. Cir. panel of Judges Dyk, Taranto and Hughes affirmed the district court’s invalidation of a Prometheus “add-on” patent (U.S. Pat. No. 6,284,770) to a method to treat a form of irritable bowel...
View ArticleAriosa v. Sequenom – Cert. Denied
Not surprisingly, the Fed. Cir., on December 2nd, denied Sequenom’s petition for rehearing en banc of the invalidation of certain of the claims of U.S. Pat. No. 6,258,540 which were directed to methods...
View ArticleObama Launches Cancer Moonshot Task Force – But Where’s The Patent Power?
On January 28, 2016, the White House issued a Memorandum establishing the Moonshot Task Force “to double the rate of progress in the fight against cancer – and put ourselves on a path to achieve in...
View ArticleTherasense Puts A World Of (Antitrust) Hurt On 3M
Commentators who have declared inequitable conduct dead and buried should study TransWeb, LLC v. 3M Innovative Properties Co., App. No. 2014-1646 (Fed. Cir., Feb. 10 2016). {A copy can be found at the...
View ArticleOhio Willow Wood’s Appeal of IC Finding Goes Up In Smoke
On February 19th, the Fed. Cir. affirmed a District Court’s finding of inequitable conduct in Ohio Willow Wood Co. (OWW) v. Alps South (Alps), LLC, following the Fed. Cir.’s remand of summary judgment...
View ArticleSequenom Files Petition for Cert. After Invalidation of Cff Patent
Sequenom, the loser in “Ariosa,” has filed a petition seeking Supreme Court review of the Fed. Cir.’s invalidation of the claims of US Pat. No. 6,258,540 as an attempt to claim a natural product,...
View ArticleSuperman Breyer v. Batman Lourie Battle in the Sequenom Petition for Cert.
Since this is an amplification of my last post on the Sequenom petition for cert. in Sequenom v. Ariosa, please go back at read my first post on the petition. I have been arguing for some years that...
View Article