In a unanimous panel decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the finding of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that claims directed to cloned cattle, sheep, pigs and goats were directed to non-patent eligible...more
In In re Packard, the Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision upholding the rejection of Packard’s claims for indefiniteness. The per curiam decision approaches the issue from the...more
Well, it’s happening. Office Actions with new patent eligibility rejections based on the USPTO’s March 4, 2014 Guidance are being mailed out to patent practitioners across the nation. While some new rejections under §101 were...more
In a decision issued on April 18, 2014, Judge Payne of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted the USPTO’s motion to dismiss the case brought by Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC to challenge the...more
Myriad has appealed the district court decision that denied its motion for a preliminary injunction against Ambry Genetics Corp. According to a report in Bloomberg BNA Life Sciences Law & Industry Report™, on April 14, 2014,...more
4/17/2014
/ Ambry ,
AMP v Myriad ,
Appeals ,
Life Sciences ,
Myriad ,
Myriad v Ambry ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
USPTO
One advantage of being a blogger in the relatively small world of patents is that I have gotten to know practitioners in other countries who also have a keen interest in patent law. One such person is Australian Registered...more
The Federal Register Notice promulgating the proposed Attributable Owner rules offers some lofty justifications for the rules. Because the rules have been promulgated pursuant to a White House initiative, they are likely to...more
In a Federal Register Notice published March 27, 2014, the USPTO announced a Glossary Pilot Program that will offer expedited examination to new patent applications in certain technology areas that include a glossary of terms...more
In his State of the Union Address given on January 28, 2014, President Obama recognized the need for continued and increased investment in new technologies, including technologies specific to the biological and pharmaceutical...more
In Mohsenzadeh v. Lee (decided March 19, 2014), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia held that the Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) statute does not provide PTA to a divisional application when the USPTO...more
The USPTO has set up a new web page with resources for examining claims for patent subject matter eligibility, including a link to the slides used in training programs for Examiners in Technology Centers 1600 and 1700. While...more
In a Federal Register Notice issued March 5, 2014, the USPTO announced interim rules under the Track I prioritized examination program that ease the formal requirements for obtaining Track I prioritized examination of a new...more
The new USPTO patent subject matter eligibility guidelines set forth a detailed analytical framework for evaluating whether claims satisfy the patent subject matter eligibility requirement of 35 USC § 101. If you are an...more
The USPTO’s new patent subject matter eligibility guidelines (the “Guidelines”) include examples that apply the multi-factored analysis mandated by the Guidelines to compositions that include one or more “natural products” as...more
The USPTO issued new guidelines for determining if claims are eligible for patenting in light of the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S., 133 S. Ct. 2107, 2116, 106 USPQ2d 1972 (2013), and...more
The USPTO has issued new patent subject matter eligibility guidelines to aid examiners in applying the principles of Myriad and Prometheus to any claim “reciting or involving laws of nature/natural principles, natural...more
The March 3, 2014 edition of BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal® — Daily Update included an interesting article by Qing (Becky) Lin about “Strategies for Minimizing Patent Term Loss Due to Double Patenting.” I agree...more
In Tempo Lighting, Inc. v. Tivoli, LLC, the Federal Circuit vacated the decision of the U.S. Patent Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board that had reversed the Examiner’s rejection of most of the claims of the patent at issue....more
In Medtronic CoreValve, LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that the patent at issue was invalid because of a defective priority claim. While practitioners may cringe...more
A year after its “Roundtable on Proposed Requirements for Recordation of Real Party-in-Interest Information Throughout Application Pendency and Patent Term,” and six months after the White House Task Force on High-Tech Patent...more
Since the Patent Law Treaty Implementation Act took effect on December 18, 2013, applicants may have noticed that they are being given a longer period of time to respond to certain Office Actions, such as Restriction...more
In Abraxis Bioscience, LLC v. Kappos, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-00730., (D.D.C. Jan. 08, 2014), Judge Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colombia upheld the USPTO’s interpretation of the Patent Term...more
In Institut Pasteur v. Focarino, the Federal Circuit found that the obviousness determination by the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences was not supported by substantial evidence, and rested on an “erroneous...more
On December 5, 2013, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 3309, the “Innovation Act” originally introduced by Congressman Goodlatte (R-VA). The bill passed by a vote of 325-91, with four amendments to the bill as...more
On November 29, 2013, the USPTO published its proposed rules to implement “the Hague Agreement Concerning International Registration of Industrial Designs.” The changes relate to the design patent provisions of Title I of the...more