Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- BioNTech Sues Moderna over mRNA Vaccine Technology
- CNIPA Issues Letter on Identity of Foreign Inventors
- REGENEXBIO Inc. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- 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
about
Category: Federal Circuit
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Judge Bryson, the third member of the panel deciding the Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Myriad) case, wrote an opinion concurring-in-part and dissenting-in-part. Judge Bryson concurred in the Court's judgment on all issues except the patent-eligibility of isolated DNA molecules including genomic DNA and…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Yesterday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the District Court for the Southern District of New York finding that Defendants-Appellants Barr Laboratories, Inc. and Pliva-Hrvatska d.o.o. ("Barr") infringed U.S. Patent No. 5,214,052. The '052 patent, which is assigned to Plaintiff-Appellee Mitsubishi Chemical Corp., relates to argatroban solutions containing ethanol, water,…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — In the Federal Circuit's decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Myriad case), Judge Kimberly Moore wrote a separate opinion in which she concurred with the opinion of the panel affirming the District Court's judgment on the standing issues and the method claims, and…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit rendered a fractured decision on Friday in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Myriad case), with a majority opinion by Judge Lourie, a concurring opinion by Judge Moore joining in certain parts of the "majority" opinion and in other parts concurring with…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — On the very day that the Federal Circuit rendered its decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Myriad case), Plaintiffs sent a letter to the Court responding to an allegation regarding the standing issue in the case. As discussed yesterday, Defendants' (Myriad's) counsel sent a letter to the Court contending that…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit handed down its long-anticipated decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Myriad case). In an extensive and thorough opinion by Judge Lourie (only appropriate in a case where the District Court's opinion reached 156 pages), the Court affirmed the District Court's decision…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — As discussed yesterday, a panel of the Federal Circuit seemingly expanded the scope of the written description requirement in its Boston Scientific Corp. v. Johnson & Johnson decision. At issue was the extent of disclosure required for combination claims, i.e., inventions combining components known in the art to produce a…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — As anyone following the AMP v. USPTO (Myriad) case will appreciate, one of the the grounds for appeal by Defendant Myriad is that the plaintiffs do not have standing to bring the suit. Since the District Court declined to rule on the Constitutional issues (1st Amendment/freedom of speech and 14th…
-
Federal Circuit's Expanding Application of the Written Description Requirement By Kevin E. Noonan — Last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court finding on summary judgment that claims relating to coronary artery stents coated with rapamycin analogs were invalid for failure to satisfy the written description requirement. The technology relates to drug-eluting coronary artery…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The doctrine of equivalents, and the extent to which prosecution history estoppel limits application of the doctrine, was perhaps the issue that prompted the Supreme Court to start its decade-long review (and, generally, reversal) of Federal Circuit precedent (in cases like eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., KSR Int'l Co. v.…
Patent Docs 