Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- To Require an Inventor ID, or Not to Require an Inventor ID – That Is the Question
- Federal Circuit Refuses to Switch District Court’s Finding for Nintendo
- Supreme Court to Resolve Dispute Over Marketing of “Skinny Labeled” Generics
- Solicitor General Proves Persuasive; Supreme Court Grants Hikma’s Certiorari Petition
- CNIPA Implements Inventor ID Requirement
about
Category: Miscellaneous
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Once recombinant cells were deemed to constitute patentable subject matter by the U.S. Supreme Court in Diamond v. Chakrabarty, fundamental properties of such cells began to pose new challenges to traditional patent law concepts. One such property is that these cells were capable of replicating to produce copies…
-
The authors and contributors of Patent Docs wish their readers a Happy Holidays. Publication of Patent Docs will resume on December 26th.
-
By Robert Dailey — Life sciences companies Invitrogen and Genetic Applications (GA) have settled the patent infringement suit that GA filed last year alleging infringement of U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE39,220. The ‘220 patent is directed to methods of transplanting DNA into a eukaryotic genome to yield hematopoietic cell lines. These cell lines…
-
The authors and contributors of Patent Docs wish their readers a Happy Thanksgiving. Publication of Patent Docs will resume on November 25th.
-
One year ago today, the authors listed on the sidebar to the left — Donald Zuhn, Kevin Noonan, Jason Derry, Chris Singer, and Sherri Oslick — began publishing Patent Docs, a weblog focusing on recent developments in biotech and pharma patent law. Chris Singer penned the first new Patent Docs article, which discussed the electronic…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Judge James C. Cacheris, Senior Judge sitting in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, delivered what is perhaps the most significant ruling in U.S. patent law this year (and this includes the Supreme Court’s KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. opinion). He granted GlaxoSmithKline’s…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — In Schwarz Pharma, Inc. v. Paddock Labs., Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court determination that infringement under the doctrine of equivalents was precluded by prosecution history estoppel, and decided whether a patentee is an indispensable party to confer standing on the exclusive licensee. Schwarz Pharma and…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Federal District Court Judge Patti Saris handed down her decision in a major class action suit against several pharmaceutical companies, and the pharmaceutical companies cannot be happy with the result. In re Pharmaceutical Industry Average Wholesale Price Litigation, MDL No. 1456, Civil Action No. 01-12257-PBS (D. Mass. 2007).…
-
Federal Circuit Upholds Liability And Damages in Genetically Modified Soybean Case By Sherri Oslick — Monsanto holds two patents related to its Roundup Ready technology: U.S. Patent No. 5,633,435 (RE39,247) and 5,352,605 [NB: Monsanto has asserted these two patents against nine farmers in the last five months.] Genetically modified Roundup Ready seeds yield…
-
Federal Circuit Increases Risk for Biotechnology Patent Prosecutors By Kevin E. Noonan — In a decision that might not be noticed by most biotechnology patent prosecutors, McKesson Information Solutions, Inc. v. Bridge Medical, Inc., the Federal Circuit significantly increased the extent to which the duty of candor extends to activities occurring during prosecution…
Patent Docs 