Tag Archives: Patents

Section viii Statements — Still A Viable Route to Generic Approval Where the Application Is Not Claimed in an Orange Book Patent

By Nagendra Setty and Mark E. McGrath In its recent decision in AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP v. Apotex Corp., Nos. 2011-1182 – 2011-1190 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 9, 2012) (hereinafter the “AstraZeneca Decision”) (Rader*, Bryson & Linn), the Federal Circuit affirmed a District of Delaware decision dismissing an infringement case for failure to state a claim, pursuant … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Holds That a Law of Nature Applied Using Known and Obvious Steps Is Not Patent Eligible

By Kevin Capps On March 20, 2012, the Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Mayo Collaborative Services, DBA Mayo Medical Laboratories, et al. v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., with potentially far-reaching ramifications for pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, particularly those developing diagnostic methods and assays.… Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Narrows Claim Construction Options in Game Controller Suit

By Ryan Lindsey and Nick Setty In Thorner v. Sony Computer Entertainment America, LLC (Case No. 2011-1114, Feb. 1, 2012) (Moore*, Rader & Aiken (D. Or. sitting by designation)), the Federal Circuit reiterated the prohibition against importing limitations from the specification and reversed a district court construction depending from consistent uses of the disputed phrase in … Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Holds that “Isolated DNA Molecules” Are Patentable Subject Matter and Method Claims Merely “Comparing” or “Analyzing” Are Not

The Federal Circuit issued its much-anticipated decision in The Association for Molecular Pathology v. United States Patent and Trademark Office on July 29, 2011. The case concerns Myriad Genetics, Inc. and its patents covering two “isolated” human genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2.… Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rules That Knowledge Of Patent Is Required For Liability For Inducing Patent Infringement, But Willful Blindness Is Enough

Under section 271(b) of the Patent Act, a defendant in a patent infringement lawsuit may be held liable for inducing the infringement of a patent, i.e., causing another person to directly infringe a patent. However the language of the statute is not clear as to what conduct or intent is required for one to be … Continue Reading

Patent Reform

The Senate passed their version of a Patent Reform Bill (Senate Bill No. S. 23), on March 8, 2011 by a wide 95-5 margin. The bill makes significant changes, most notably including a first-inventor-to-file system, and an enhanced post-grant review procedures that will be conducted within the USPTO. There are 26 sections to the Senate bill.… Continue Reading

Trademarks In The Veldt: Do Virtual Lawyers Dream Of Electric Trademarks?

In Neal Stephenson’s 1992 science fiction novel, Snow Crash, humans interact as avatars in the “Metaverse,” the collective product of online shared three-dimensional space.[1] As imagined by Stephenson, this “Metaverse” has been created by all virtual worlds[2] – it is an augmented and enhanced physical reality, a physically persistent virtual space.[3] The novel is set … Continue Reading

Adjusting the Inequitable Conduct Doctrine: Federal Circuit Hears Oral Arguments En Banc in Therasense

By Gray M. Buccigross On November 9, 2010, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, heard oral arguments in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., regarding the legal tests to be applied in determining whether a patent is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. This has been a controversial issue over the last several years among … Continue Reading

United States Weighs in on Myriad Genetics Case

On Friday, October 29, 2010, the United States submitted an amicus curiae brief in the Myriad Genetics, Inc. case. (The Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., Federal Circuit Case No. 2010-1406.) Myriad Genetics holds several patents covering genomic materials relating to the human Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1 and 2. A … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rejects Bilski Claims, Overturns “Machine-or-Transformation” Requirement for Patent Eligibility of Processes

This morning, in a highly anticipated decision, a fractured Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s judgment in Bilski v. Kappos. The Court unanimously upheld the rejection of Bilski’s patent claims, which concerned a process for hedging against the risk of price changes in the energy market. But the Court split on the grounds for rejecting … Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Confirms Written Description Requirement in Ariad

On March 22, 2010, the Federal Circuit issued an important en banc decision upholding a separate written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112. In Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co., the Court rejected the patent owner’s contention that the written description requirement is simply a part of the enablement requirement, which requires … Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Grants Patent Term Extensions

In a much anticipated decision, the Federal Circuit held yesterday that two pharmaceutical companies, Wyeth and Elan Pharma, were entitled to extended patent term adjustments because the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office failed to perform a correct calculation of the adjustment. Wyeth v. Kappos, No. 2009-1120 (Fed. Cir.). The decision has broad implications because the … Continue Reading

426,000 Patent Applications Filed in China During First Half of 2009

The Chinese government’s emphasis on boosting innovation might be proving fruitful. According to the latest statistics from the State Intellectual Property Office (“SIPO”), the government entity responsible for prosecuting patents, there were 426,000 patent applications filed and 252,000 patents granted in China during the first half of 2009. Compared with the first half of 2008, … Continue Reading

Developing a Foreign Filing Strategy

The ever-increasing reality of the global marketplace has, for many years, driven U.S. companies to seek intellectual property protection beyond the nation’s borders. Unfortunately, the reality they face is that global patent protection, and even multi-jurisdiction protection, is prohibitively expensive for all but those entities with the deepest of pockets. This, coupled with practicality problems … Continue Reading

Gibson’s Patent Action Against Activision Hits Wrong Chord With Court In “Guitar Hero” Dispute: Summary Judgment Granted

Activision licensed the Gibson trademark and trade dress in November 2006 in connection with Guitar Hero’s "custom guitar controller peripheral." Activision paid a one-time fixed license fee to cover the term of the license and Gibson agreed to help promote the Guitar Hero product.… Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Awards Permanent Injunction to Patentee in “Close Case”

As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., a patentee no longer can expect an automatic grant of a permanent injunction after patent infringement and validity is established. Instead, the patentee must satisfy a four-factor test by demonstrating that (1) it has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) remedies available at … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Finds Genuine Issues Relating to Possible Walker Process Fraud Arising from Counsel’s Omissions in Patent Application Process

The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed in part and reversed in part the entry of summary judgment for defendant Abbott Laboratories, Inc. ("Abbott") on claims brought under Section 2 of the Sherman Act.  The Ninth Circuit found that genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether Abbot committed Walker Process fraud, one possible "sham" exception … Continue Reading

Implications of Aristocrat v. IGT for Software Patents

The law governing U.S. software patents sometimes shifts like the ground here in California – a point illustrated by the recent decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Aristocrat Technologies Australia PTY Ltd. v. International Game Technology, 521  F.3d  1328,  1333 (Fed. Cir. 2008).   Click here to read more.… Continue Reading
LexBlog

By scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to browse our website, you consent to our use of cookies as described in our Cookie and Advertising Policy. If you do not wish to accept cookies from our website, or would like to stop cookies being stored on your device in the future, you can find out more and adjust your preferences here.

Agree