Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Retired Judges File Amicus Brief in Support of Judge Newman
- Hikma v. Amarin at the Supreme Court: The Parties’ Opening Briefs
- Teva Pharmaceuticals International v. Eli Lilly & Co. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- USPTO Extends Artificial Intelligence Search Automated Pilot Program (ASAP!)
- USPTO Announces That It Has Turned the Corner on Unexamined Application Backlog
about
Month: December 2019
-
By Michael Borella — Over five and a half years on from the Supreme Court's Alice vs. CLS Bank ruling, patentees, patent professionals, judges, and USPTO personnel are still wrestling with what it means for an invention to be eligible for patenting. This is especially true for software-related innovations. Despite the software-driven digital economy accounting…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court decision (by Circuit Judge Bryson, sitting by designation) in an ANDA litigation, finding obvious claims asserted for treating patients having mild to moderate hepatic impairment with extended release opioid formulations, in Persion Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd. In reaching…
-
Federal Circuit Upholds Invalidity of Video Game Patent Despite Board's Incorrect Claim Construction By Joseph Herndon — CG Technology Development, LLC (CG Tech) appealed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's Final Written Decision holding that the claims of U.S. Patent RE39,818 would have been obvious. The Federal Circuit found that even though the disputed limitations…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — All interferences have filings that are either kept confidential or are entirely procedural in nature. While there is little substantive to discuss, acknowledging them serves the purpose of keeping track of the proceedings; the following papers have been filed in Interference No 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard…
-
The authors and contributors of Patent Docs wish their readers and families a Happy Holidays! Publication of Patent Docs will resume on December 26th.
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last year, Judge Illston gifted patentees with a proverbial lump of coal with her decision in Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. by invalidating on summary judgment claims directed to methods for isolating cell-free fetal DNA from maternal DNA on the grounds that they are not patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C.…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit had the opportunity to interpret the extent to which the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) require the practice of the patented method that produces a product whose importation imposes infringement liability under the statute to be practiced by a single entity (it does not) in rendering…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit has grappled with, divisively in some instances, the extent to which the safe harbor provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) extend to activities not strictly for obtaining regulatory approval, such as post-approval quality testing and "stockpiling" product used for commercial purposes. For example, in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc.…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — In early November, Senior Party the Broad Institute (along with Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) filed their response to Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") Opposition to the Broad's Substantive Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 105,166. Pursuant…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier this fall, Athena Diagnostics, Inc.; Oxford University Innovation Ltd.; and Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Zur Forderung Der Wissenschaften E.V. ("Athena") filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC, requesting that the Supreme Court "provide much-needed guidance on the important question of the patent eligibility…
Patent Docs 