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 Donald Zuhn –- On Monday, Counsel for Dr. Triantafyllos Tafas filed a reply to the joint motion to dismiss the appeal in Tafas v. Kappos and for a vacatur of the District Court's injunction and judgment filed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and Appellee GlaxoSmithKline on October 9, 2009. The joint…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan –– The pitfalls attendant on collaborations between industry and academia are nicely illustrated in the Federal Circuit's decision last week in Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. Stanford asserted three patents relating to methods for using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The infamous "claims and continuation" rules promulgated over the vocal protests of patent applicants and the patent bar by the Dudas administration of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office have been officially rescinded by Director David Kappos. In a press release expected to be issued shortly, the Office will…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, a divided panel of the Federal Circuit affirmed a determination by the District Court for the District of Delaware that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 4,663,318 were invalid for lack of enablement. The '318 patent, which issued on May 5, 1987 from U.S. Application No. 06/819,141, is…
-
Sometimes, Sins of Omission Are Not Inequitable Conduct By Kevin E. Noonan — St. Thomas Aquinas recognized two types of sin: those of omission and those of commission. In patent law, inequitable conduct comes closest to this concept of sin, where frequently the accused behavior is the failure to submit to a patent examiner…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Although Amgen's erythropoietin franchise has weathered its most recent challenge by F. Hoffmann-La Roche's pegylated EPO analog, Mircera® (see Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2009)), the victory was not absolute. The status of three of the patents-in-suit — U.S. Patent Nos. 5,547,933 (the '933 patent), 5,955,422…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, the Federal Circuit determined that Plaintiff-Appellant AsymmetRx, Inc. did not have standing to bring an action for infringement of the patents-at-suit absent the participation of the President and Fellows of Harvard College. As a result, the CAFC vacated and remanded an order by the District Court for the…
-
Medical Diagnostics Claims Are Patentable Subject Matter By Kevin E. Noonan — Over the past few years, Federal Circuit decisions in In re Bilski and Classen Immunotherapeutics, Inc. v. Biogen Idec, combined with Justice Breyer's dissent in Laboratory Corp. v. Metabolite Labs., Inc. ("LabCorp"), have created more than a frisson of anxiety in the…
-
Something for Everyone, but the Injunction Stands By Kevin E. Noonan — Amgen has several times successfully defended its erythropoietin (EPO) franchise, the company's first commercial success and in many ways the crown jewel of its (or anyone's) biologics drug pipeline. That string of successes continued today with a decision by the Federal…
-
More Claim Construction Confusion from the Federal Circuit By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit demonstrated once again the quagmire that can exist when lower courts attempt to apply the CAFC's rather quixotic jurisprudence on claim construction. The case, Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC v. Sandoz, Inc.(1), arose as the result of ANDA filings by…
Patent Docs 