Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Meanwhile, Back at the PTAB with CRISPR – Update
- Judge Newman Seeks Recourse from Supreme Court
- Quo Vadis mRNA Vaccine Technology? The State of the IP Lawsuits
- Moderna Settles Patent Litigation with Arbutus et al.
- USPTO and DOJ Statement of Interest in Collision Communications: Another Thumb on the Scale in Favor of NPE Patent Plaintiffs
about
Category: Patentable Subject Matter
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Disaster survivors, and even people who just hear about a disaster, are often first overwhelmed by it; they can only rationally process its significance after some time. During that time they overcome the initial visceral reaction and contemplate the effects the disaster will have on the future (and sometimes, develop…
-
By Grantland Drutchas — As of Tuesday, June 16th, we have been living with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's "2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility" ("Guidance") for six months. Although the USPTO subsequently issued some examples and sought public comment, it started training examiners on the new Guidance almost immediately. And, of…
-
By Michael Borella — In its first substantive application of Alice v. CLS Bank in 2015, the Federal Circuit has once again shot down claims for not meeting the patent-eligibility requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101. In 2012, OIP sued Amazon in the Northern District of California, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,970,713. The…
-
By Michael Borella — The Ultramercial story is not over. In the latest step of a controversial case involving 35 U.S.C. § 101 that has been ongoing since 2009, patentee Ultramercial has petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. The parties' first two attempts to obtain high court review of currently-invalidated U.S. Patent…
-
By Michael Borella — In August, 2009, Allvoice sued Microsoft in the Western District of Washington, alleging infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 5,799,273. In December, 2013, the District Court granted Microsoft's motion for summary judgment finding that Microsoft did not infringe the asserted claims, and that claims 60-68 of the patent were invalid under…
-
By Paul Cole[1] Both U.S. practitioners and their European colleagues will be concerned about a dictum in In re Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), 750 F.3d 1333, 1338-39 (Fed. Cir. 2014) that any existing [micro]organism found in the wild is not patent-eligible. That dictum is said to follow from Diamond v Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 and Funk…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In a forum held last month on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Alexandria campus, Office representatives discussed the Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, which was released in December, and received additional input from the public regarding that guidance. The forum, which ran almost four and a half hours,…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In a forum held last month on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Alexandria campus, Office representatives discussed the Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, which was released in December, and received additional input from the public regarding that guidance. The forum, which ran almost four and a half hours,…
-
(Or, and then there was one were none) By Kevin E. Noonan — As discussed for the past month, Myriad has finally given up trying to defend its BRCA gene testing franchise. The one remaining matter, Myriad's case against GeneDx has settled, as announced by the company today. However, GeneDx has not moved before the…
-
(Or, and then there was one) By Kevin E. Noonan — As discussed at the end of January, Myriad has given up its Quixotic quest to validate its BRCA gene testing franchise and has abandoned its several lawsuits (many of which were consolidated before the District of Utah under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 and captioned…
Patent Docs 