Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Judicial Conduct and Disability Committee Has Its Say, Denies Judge Newman’s Latest Request for Review
- PTAB Issues Judgment on Priority in CRISPR Interference
- Parties File Supplemental Priority Statements in CRISPR Interference
- Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part V: The Goalposts Keep Moving
- Meanwhile, Back at the PTAB with CRISPR – Update
about
Category: Federal Circuit
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Biotechnology patent law faces the consequences of two decisions handed down last week by the Federal Circuit: In re Kubin and Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co. The first of these illustrates the folly of ignoring the wisdom of the In re Deuel decision, in applying established…
-
By Donald Zuhn — On April 1st, the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of the District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin that Defendant-Cross Appellant Third Wave Technologies, Inc. did not infringe U.S. Patent No. 5,643,715, owned by Plaintiff-Appellant Digene Corp. The panel also affirmed the District Court's grant of summary judgment dismissing…
-
By Andrew Williams — On Friday, the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., reversing the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts's denial of Lilly's motion for JMOL in view of a jury verdict of infringement and validity of the asserted claims, and affirming the…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The sky isn't falling. But it's becoming increasingly clear that when the Supreme Court sneezes, the Federal Circuit gets a cold (if not pneumonia). And the questions continue about whether the Federal Circuit as currently constituted has the institutional fortitude to exercise its Congressional mandate to harmonize patent law…
-
By Donald Zuhn — This morning, the Federal Circuit issued decisions in both In re Kubin and Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co. In Kubin, the Federal Circuit, with Circuit Judge Rader writing for Circuit Judges Friedman and Linn, affirmed the Board's decision that Kubin's claims were obvious. In Ariad Pharmaceuticals, the…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The duality of nucleic acids has long posed a challenge to patent law. A gene is, in one way of looking at it, "but a chemical compound, albeit a complex one," and this view of the gene's nature has informed the emphasis on "structure, structure, structure" taken by the…
-
By Donald Zuhn — On Friday, the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Tafas v. Doll (formerly Tafas v. Dudas). The Tafas appeal concerns the validity of four rules in the continuation and claims rules package promulgated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on August 21, 2007. The four rules at issue are: …
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — It has been quite some time since most in the patent community have given much thought to the ill-advised "claims and continuation" rules promulgated by the Patent and Trademark Office on August 21, 2007 that were preliminarily enjoined on Halloween, 2007 (one day before they were to go into…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In a 55-page opinion issued earlier today, the Federal Circuit determined that the four rules at issue in Tafas v. Dudas are procedural, but that Rule 78 is inconsistent with 35 U.S.C. § 120 (i.e., that portion of the rule which limits the number of continuation applications), and therefore, affirmed-in-part,…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit occupies a unique place in the Federal appellate system. Like the D.C. Circuit and unlike the other circuits, it is not regional and its jurisdiction is not limited to Federal District Courts in a particular geographical area. Instead, its subject matter…
Patent Docs 