ALCHEMISTS' LINK TO CHEM/PHARMA GOLD
This link below will lead you to a wealth of recent chem/pharma caselaw and policy materials organized by Kevin Buckley for his lectures on Biotechnology Law at Washington University in St. Louis...
View ArticleO’Malley Nomination To Fed. Cir. Moves Forward
On September 23rd, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the nomination of Judge Kathleen O’Malley (N.D. Ohio) to fill a vacancy on the Federal Circuit. Judge O’Malley has handled significant IP...
View ArticleU.S. Court of Appeals Stays Decision to Bar Stem Cell Funding
A three judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia stayed the recent district court ruling which voided President Obama’s executive order permitting Federal funding for research...
View ArticleSupreme Court Grants Cert. in Microsoft v. i4i.
Today, the Supreme Court granted Microsoft’s petition for cert. in Microsoft v. i4i. Microsoft asked the Supreme Court to answer the question of whether or not a defendant who asserts patent invalidity...
View ArticleSiemens v. Saint-Gobain – What’s Sauce For The Goose May Leave The Gander...
Contributed by Jim Nelson, J.D., Ph.D. of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. The Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Ceramics & Plastics, Inc., (a copy is available at the end...
View ArticleMicrosoft V. i4i – Prosecution And The “Variable Proof Regime”
The Government recently weighed in on this important appeal with its amicus brief, signed by Neal Katyal, Acting Solicitor General. (A copy can be found at the end of this post.) The question posed is...
View ArticleFederal Court Hears Myriad Gene Case This Morning
The following is a guest post from Professor Ann McCrackin. I attended oral arguments at the CAFC on Monday for Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. The three-judge panel...
View ArticleSupreme Court: Evidence Of Invalidity Must Be “Clear And Convincing”
On June 9, 2011, the Supreme Court rejected Microsoft’s contention that a preponderance of the evidence should be sufficient to establish patent invalidity in an 8-0 (Roberts abstained) opinion, which...
View ArticleSupreme Court Remands In Myriad Appeal
Today, as predicted by many commentators, the Supreme Court set aside the ruling by the Fed. Cir. that claims to isolated DNA sequences that are the BRCA 1 or 2 gene, or fragments thereof, are...
View ArticleBosch, Ultramercial, Commil, Fresenius: All-Star Break
A guest post from Ron Schutz of Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi The Federal Circuit goes into the symbolic half-way point of summer leading the league with a series of homerun opinions. To keep the...
View ArticleStories I Missed In 2013
Some IP Stories Do Not Have Much “It” Factor. Just like there used to be, and I guess still are, “It Girls” in showbiz and fashion, there are “It Issues” in IP law. I know these...
View ArticleRader Steps Down – Prost Steps Up
Judge Randall Rader will step down as Chief Judge of the Fed. Cir. on May 30th, and Judge Sharon Prost will replace him. Judge Rader will remain active as a “Circuit Court Judge.” As Chief Judge, Rader...
View ArticleArendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple, Inc. – Defining “Common Sense”
For some time, I have wanted to do a post on this recent Fed. Cir. decision (Appeal No. 2015-2073 (Fed. Cir. , August 10, 2016),) in which the Fed. Cir. panel of Judges Moore, Linn and O’Malley...
View ArticleApotex v Wyeth Explores Structural Obviousness
Lately, I’ve been feeling that the only case law engaging enough to write about has involved S. 101 issues, so it was a welcome break to comment on some classic principles of organic chemistry. Apotex...
View ArticleVanda v. Roxane Labs. – Are Two Natural Laws Better Than One?
As you will recall, in Prometheus v. Mayo, the Supreme Court held that a claim reciting a natural law had to have other non-conventional steps to pass muster under s. 101. The natural law in Mayo was...
View ArticleChisum and Mueller Dissect The Recent En Banc Decision In Apple v Samsung...
This is a guest post by Donald Chisum and Janice Mueller. The Federal Circuit’s October 7, 2016 en banc decision, 2016 WL 5864573, concerning one phase of the ongoing Apple v. Samsung smartphone patent...
View ArticlePTO Proposes Revisions to the Duty of Disclosure (“Rule 56”)
After issuing a brief “notice” in 2011, shortly after the Fed. Cir. revised the duty of disclosure in the Therasense (76 FR at 43631), the PTO has now published a notice of proposed rulemaking to...
View ArticlePatent Office Releases Comments on Standards for Patent Eligibility Examination
On November 2nd, Robert Bahr released a concise but informative memorandum that could be entitled “What We Learned From McRO and BASCOM.” I have posted on McRO, Inc. dba Planet Blue v. Bandi Namco...
View ArticleIn re NuVasive, Inc. – Explain Yourself!
In re NuVasive Emphasizes the Importance of Reasoning in the Obviousness Question. Since KSR, 127 S.Ct. 1727 (2007), repudiated as “rigid and mandatory” the Federal Circuit “rule” for obviousness –...
View ArticleChisum Academy Awards for 2016 to Federal Circuit Decisions
This is a guest post from the Chisum Patent Academy. Chisum and Mueller selected the following fifteen (15) cases as the most impactful of the Federal Circuit’s precedential patent law decisions issued...
View Article