Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
about
Category: Patentable Subject Matter
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The European Court of Justice (ECJ) today rendered its decision regarding the patent-eligibility of human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) in Europe, and as widely expected has heeded the recommendation of the court's advocate general that hESCs are not patent-eligible subject matter (see "European Court of Justice Considers Embryonic Stem Cell…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — A little more than one year after the Supreme Court issued its opinion on the patent-eligibility of (business) method claims in Bilski v. Kappos, the Court has granted certiorari in one case (Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services) and may consider two others (Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec. and…
-
On Friday, the Federal Circuit (presumably) denied Defendants' petition for panel rehearing in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Unlike the Court's earlier notice regarding denial of Plaintiffs'/Appellees' petition, this notice did not identify the party (but Defendants' petition was the only one pending). In their petition, counsel for Defendants asserted…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Yesterday, the Federal Circuit denied Plaintiffs' petition for panel rehearing in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. In their petition, counsel for Plaintiffs/Appellees asserted two grounds for rehearing, of points of law and fact overlooked or apprehended by the Court (see "Plaintiff(s) File Petition for Rehearing…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Accompanying the Federal Circuit's majority decision in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC is a separate explication of "additional views" by Chief Judge Rader (at right) joined by Judge Newman. These views tend towards the policy and philosophical implications of patent eligibility challenges before the Court in several cases (In re…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Federal Circuit majority decision in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC engendered a strong dissent from Judge Moore on almost every aspect of that decision. Judge Moore disagreed with the majority's opinion that the claims were patent-eligible, that the issue of inherent anticipation was not properly before the Court,…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Today, the Federal Circuit revisited the patent-eligibility of claims directed to methods for optimizing childhood immunization, in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC. The Federal Circuit's original opinion, handed down in December 2008, was vacated by the Supreme Court in view of that Court's decision in Bilski v. Kappos, and…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Yesterday, counsel for defendants/appellants filed a petition for rehearing before the Federal Circuit in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Defendants assert a single ground for rehearing, based on the standing issue and particularly related to their allegations that Dr. Harry Ostrer (the only plaintiff found to…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — On Thursday, counsel for plaintiffs/appellees in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (who may be simply Dr. Harry Ostrer, the only plaintiff with standing in the case after the panel decision) filed a petition for panel rehearing before the Federal Circuit. As grounds for rehearing, Plaintiffs list…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — On Thursday, counsel for plaintiffs/appellees in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (who may be simply Dr. Harry Ostrer, the only plaintiff with standing in the case after the panel decision) filed a petition for rehearing before the Federal Circuit. Patent Docs will make the petition…
Patent Docs 