Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- USPTO Moves to Protect Design Rights for Digital Innovations
- 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
about
Category: Obviousness
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The recent discussion of the Federal Circuit's decision in the In re Kubin case suggests there may be some misunderstanding of the science behind the legal question of obviousness. Because obviousness is a question of law based heavily on underlying issues of fact, it is important for commentators as…
-
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 Kevin E. Noonan — Genentech announced last week that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had determined it would issue a re-examination certificate in Re-examination Control No. 90/007,542 involving U.S. Patent No. 6,331,415 ("the Cabilly II patent"). While a major victory for Genentech, it represents a bitter defeat for Medimmune, Genentech's licensee, as…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit heard oral argument for In re Kubin last week, and a very hot bench (Judge Rader presiding, joined by Judges Linn and Friedman) sharply challenged the positions of both Kubin and the Patent Office. While it is foolish to attempt to read the tea leaves of…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit will hear oral argument on Thursday for In re Kubin, a case having great significance for biotechnology patenting. At issue is the question of whether the existence in the prior art of a purified protein, combined with "routine" cloning methods, renders obvious a claim to a…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Yesterday, we counted down stories #9 to #6 of the top stories covered at Patent Docs in 2008 (see "Top Stories of 2008: #9 to #6"), and on New Year's Day, we listed stories #13 to #10 (see "Top Stories of 2008: #13 to #10"). Today, we conclude our second…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Denial of an ANDA validity challenge by generic pharmaceutical company Apotex of Sanofi-Synthelabo's Orange Book-listed patent for Plavix® was affirmed by the Federal Circuit last week. The decision, by Judge Newman, joined by Judges Lourie and Bryson, was unremarkable and should remain so, unless the Supreme Court were to…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a determination by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences that the claims of U.S. Application No. 10/041,958 would have been obvious in view of five prior art references. The '958 application, filed by Appellants Saul Tzipori, Ramaswamy Balakrishnan, and Arthur Donohue-Rolfe (Tzipori), relates…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit today affirmed AstraZeneca’s latest victory in its long-running battle against generic drug companies who filed ANDAs for its (former) blockbuster drug, Prilosec®. The Court affirmed in toto the decisions of Judge Barbara S. Jones, the District Court judge sitting in the Southern District of New…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Sanity may be returning to the Federal Circuit’s treatment of two issues, obviousness and inequitable conduct. In Eisai Co. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc., the Court (in an opinion by Judge Rader joined by Judges Linn and Prost) affirmed the District Court’s determination that the patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent…
Patent Docs 