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 — In its recent decision in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, the Federal Circuit cited and distinguished its earlier decision in In re Grams, 888 F.2d 835 (Fed. Cir. 1989). A review of the Grams case proves informative, both in understanding the Federal Circuit's reasoning and in better outlining…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, in Sanofi-Aventis v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated the entry of a consent judgment and an injunction by the District Court for the District of New Jersey, which enjoined Defendants-Appellants Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd. and Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd. ("Sun") from manufacturing and selling a generic version of…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — On Friday, the Federal Circuit continued its explication of the metes and bounds of patent-eligible subject matter after the Supreme Court's Bilski v. Kappos decision by revisiting (and reconsidering) its decision in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services. The Court in its earlier decision had reversed a District Court…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week marked the deadline for the submission of amicus curiae briefs in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees or in support of neither party in the Association of Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("Myriad") case (briefs in support of Defendants-Appellants were due on October 29). With the help of Patent…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In an amicus brief filed on October 28 in the Association of Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("Myriad") case, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. supports reversal of the District Court's decision and asks the Federal Circuit "to provide clear guidance on patent-eligibility to remove the unnecessary cloud cast by the…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — One of the arguments advanced by the plaintiffs in Association of Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("Myriad") is that a pernicious effect of permitting patents on genes and genetic diagnostic methods is that women cannot obtain a "second opinion" of the results of genetic tests showing mutations…
-
By Donald Zuhn — On October 22, Defendants-Appellants Myriad Genetics, Inc. and ten Directors of the University of Utah Research Foundation filed their brief in Association of Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (see "Myriad Files Appeal Brief in AMP v. USPTO"). Pursuant to Rule 29(e) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure,…
-
By James DeGiulio — In another amicus brief filed in late October in the Association of Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("Myriad") case, Prof. J. Jeffrey Hawley and Prof. Ann McCrackin, writing on behalf of amicus University of New Hampshire School of Law, criticize Judge Sweet's District Court decision substantively and procedurally. …
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — One of the more unusual aspects of the Supreme Court's Bilski v. Kappos decision was its direction, towards the end of the majority opinion, that the Federal Circuit develop its case law on what would constitute an "abstract idea" for purposes of patent eligibility. After a decade of using the…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In one of nine amicus briefs filed in late October in the Association of Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("Myriad") case, amici Rosetta Genomics Ltd., Rosetta Genetics, Inc., and George Mason University focus solely on the patentability of Myriad's isolated DNA claims, and conclude that "isolated DNA composition…
Patent Docs 