
Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- Collision Communications v. Samsung: What Good Did the Government’s Statement of Interest Do?
- United States Files Statement of Interest in Patent Infringement Proceedings
- Supreme Court Oral Argument in Hikma v. Amarin
- Enviro Tech Chemical Services, Inc. v. Safe Foods Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2026)
- Hikma v. Amarin: The Amici Speak – Part III
about
Category: Uncategorized
-
By Donald Zuhn — In a joint press release issued on Monday, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and European Patent Office announced that the two offices would be working together to develop a joint patent classification system. One of the goals of the joint effort will be to align the EPO classification and U.S.…
-
By Sherri Oslick — About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Galderma Laboratories LP et al. v. Actavis Mid Atlantic LLC1:10-cv-00887; filed October 15, 2010 in the District Court of Delaware • Plaintiffs: Galderma Laboratories LP; Galderma SA; Galderma Research and Development SNC• Defendant: Actavis Mid Atlantic…
-
By James DeGiulio — As the Patent Reform Act of 2010 makes its way through the Senate, various groups continue to make their positions known on provisions contained within the legislation. (For a detailed summary of the bill, see "Senate Leadership Unveils Details of Patent Reform Agreement.") On September 12, the Intellectual Property Owners Association…
-
By James DeGiulio — Genzyme's manufacturing problems with their $300,000 per year drug Fabrazyme have prompted patients who depend on the enzyme replacement drug to ask that Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius exercise the government's "march-in rights" under the Bayh-Dole Act. The 1980 law empowers the federal agency funding the research, here…
-
By Donald Zuhn — In March, the District Court for the Southern District of New York found the claims of several of Myriad Genetics patents (directed to the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes) invalid, ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in Association of Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (see "Round One Goes…
-
June 1, 2010 – Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical (BCP) Customer Partnership Meeting (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) – Alexandria, VA June 10, 2010 – "Patents and the Written Description Requirement: Meeting Section 112 Disclosure Obligations After Ariad v. Lilly" (Strafford) – 1:00 – 2:30 PM (EST) June 11, 2010 – "The Future of U.S. Patent Law: An In-Depth…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — In what may be considered a softening (or at least a change) in its approach to protecting its patented technology, Monsanto announced that it would not enforce any contractual provisions regarding its Roundup Ready® transgenic seed (that preclude growers from replanting genetically-engineered seeds) once the patents on that technology…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) released a report on intellectual property trends showing that the number of filed patent, trademark, and industrial design applications increased in 2007 ("World Intellectual Property Indicators 2009"). However, preliminary results for 2008 indicate that application filings dropped last year, a result not…
-
By Christopher P. Singer — In a March 12, 2009 press release, Roche and Genentech announced that the two companies had agreed on terms of a merger agreement. According to the report, the terms of the agreement include Roche's cash acquisition of all outstanding publicly held shares of Genentech stock at $95 per share,…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — An astute reader has asked, regarding our post concerning EXACT Sciences' announcement of the issuance of U.S. Patent No. 7,485,420, whether the claims of the '420 patent would be invalid under the Federal Circuit's In re Bilski standard for patentable subject matter. The independent claims of the '420 patent…