Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- USPTO and DOJ Statement of Interest in Collision Communications: Another Thumb on the Scale in Favor of NPE Patent Plaintiffs
- Oasis Tooling, Inc. v. Siemens Industry Software Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- Why AI Will Not Take Over the World
- BioNTech Sues Moderna over mRNA Vaccine Technology
- CNIPA Issues Letter on Identity of Foreign Inventors
about
Category: Federal Circuit
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — In Anna Karenina, Leo Tolstoy wrote, "All happy families resemble one another, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." This sentiment could also be applied to the briefs submitted to the Federal Circuit for its en banc consideration of the written description requirement. A large proportion of…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) has filed an amicus brief in the rehearing en banc of Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., supporting neither party but arguing in favor of a separate written description requirement as part of 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph. The IPO's…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In anticipation of the upcoming oral argument in the rehearing en banc of Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., scheduled for December 7th, we have been reviewing a number of the briefs submitted by various amici. (We learned of an additional amicus brief that was filed last week,…
-
By Donald Zuhn — With oral argument in the rehearing en banc of Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co. scheduled for Monday, December 7, 2009, last Friday marked the deadline for the filing of amicus curiae briefs. Twenty-four amicus briefs were submitted (by our count), with eighteen briefs filed in support of…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The three members of the "high technology" community named above have weighed in on the Federal Circuit's en banc review of the written requirement and provide their own unique perspective on a debate that has raged primarily in the biotechnology sector over the past several years (see amicus brief). …
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Christopher M. Holman, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City (and proprietor of Holman's Biotech IP Blog), has filed an amicus brief in support of neither party in Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co. While not arguing on behalf of either party, Ariad would…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier this month, Donald Chisum (at right), who for the past 31 years has authored the patent treatise Chisum on Patents, was in Chicago to give a luncheon presentation on recent patent law developments to a group of local practitioners. Mr. Chisum, who was professor of law at the University…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, Defendant-Appellant Eli Lilly & Co. filed its principal brief for the rehearing en banc of Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., which is scheduled for December 7th. (Patent Docs provided a summary of Ariad's principal brief, which was filed on October 5th, last Tuesday; see "Next…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Chief Judge Paul Michel, writing for most of the en banc Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Judge Lourie took no part in the decision), today granted the joint motion of all parties to dismiss the appeal of Tafas v. Kappos. Thus, the infamous "continuation and claims rules"…
-
By Donald Zuhn — With oral argument before the Supreme Court in In re Bilski now concluded, patent practitioners can begin to turn their attention toward the next big patent case awaiting oral argument: the Federal Circuit's en banc rehearing of Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., which is scheduled for December 7th. …
Patent Docs 