Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Apple v. Squires: USPTO Director Has Unlimited Discretion on IPR Institution
- The Ghost in the Machine: Why GenAI Can Be Both a Brilliant Researcher and a Terrible Advocate
- Bayer Files Suit Against Trio of COVID-19 Vaccine Makers
- Allen v. Cooper (4th Cir. 2026)
- To Require an Inventor ID, or Not to Require an Inventor ID – That Is the Question
about
Month: October 2007
-
Management Forum will be holding a conference entitled "Biotechnology for the Non-Biotechnologist" on November 12-14, 2007 in Miami, FL. The purpose of the conference is to provide non-biotechnologists with a basic understanding of the principles, techniques, and potentials of biotechnology. Conference speakers include Carol Kirchhoff, Senior Principal Scientist at Pfizer Inc.; Dr. Dennis Kraichely, Principal…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier today, David Boundy, the Vice President of Intellectual Property for Cantor Fitzgerald L.P., provided Patent Docs (and other members of the patent law blogging community) with a copy of a letter he sent to Susan Dudley of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last week, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office promulgated its long-awaited guidelines for Examiners in making obviousness determinations in view of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (see "Patent Office Issues Examination Guidelines Regarding Obviousness after KSR"). As part of these guidelines,…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Patent Office has met the enemy, and it is the patent bar. This has been evident since the original Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with regard to the continuation and claims limitations rules, where the Office blamed the bar for the proliferation of continuation applications and alleged prolixity…
-
By Donald Zuhn — The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has added four new forms to its Claims and Continuations Practice webpage. The new form likely to get the most use is PTO/SB/206, which can be used to identify commonly owned applications and patents pursuant to Rule 78(f)(1) and provide a rebuttal or…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Reliable sources inform Patent Docs that the House of Representatives, having finished its summer portion of mischief by passing H.R. 1908 "reforming" U.S. patent law into unrecognizability, is set to turn its attention to the bill, introduced by Congressman Becerra (31st Dist., Cal.) (at right), that would ban…
-
By Jason Derry — Patent Docs has learned from posts to the "EFS-Web" list that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is now identifying applications in private PAIR as failing to comply with the new 5/25 claim limitation rules. Users of Partridge, a free program developed by the Oppedahl Patent Law Firm LLC…
-
By Sherri Oslick — Immunomedics, Inc. of Morris Plains, NJ has been awarded U.S. Patent No. 7,282,567 ("Monoclonal antibody hPAM4," issued October 16, 2007) covering a humanized monoclonal antibody to a particular epitope in the MUC1 antigen expressed in most pancreatic cancers. The patent also covers therapeutic and diagnostic derivatives of hPAM4 for…
-
Strafford CLE Teleconferences will be offering a telephone conference entitled: "Sweeping USPTO Patent Rule Changes for Continuations and Claims: Strategies to Meet the New Obligations under the Complex Rules" on October 24, 2007 from 1:00-2:30 PM (EST). Speakers Marc E. Brown and Bernard Codd of McDermott Will & Emery and Stephen G. Kunin of Oblon…
-
ANDA Filing Not Violation of Express Terms of Injunction By Sherri Oslick — In an opinion authored by Chief Judge Michel and issued late last week, the CAFC reversed the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, finding Apotex not to have violated an injunction prohibiting it from manufacturing, using,…
Patent Docs 