In the shadow of its recent, precedent-challenging In re Cellect decision, the Federal Circuit illustrated the pedestrian application of its obviousness-type double patenting jurisprudence in affirming the Patent Trial and...more
In what was an otherwise run-of-the-mill affirmance of a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) (albeit somewhat noteworthy in affirming the Board's determination that the challenged claims were not invalid),...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has benefited, particularly after enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, from the deference to its factual findings mandated by the Supreme Court's interpretation in...more
In earlier times, the Federal Circuit, responding to efforts by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to reject patent applications directed to biotechnology-related inventions, held (In re Brana) that utility of such...more
The decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in favor of Senior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, "Broad") and against Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the...more
The Federal Circuit provided a reminder last week that merely identifying an unappreciated consequence of a prior art method cannot confer non-obviousness on practice of methods that did not acknowledge that consequence, in...more
Through the vicissitudes of the continuing chaos of subject matter eligibility, Senators Coons and Tillis have been steadfast in attempting to provide a legislative solution. They chaired a series of Congressional hearings in...more
"This application claims priority to [properly identified earlier-filed application, the disclosure of which is expressly incorporated herein in its entirety" is a phrase commonly found in patents and patent applications as...more
The PTAB held an Oral Hearing between Junior Party the University of California, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") and Senior Party ToolGen on September 12th, bringing to a close...more
A little more than three years ago, the Federal Circuit rejected the University of Minnesota's contention that LSI was barred from bringing (and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board barred from hearing) an inter partes review of...more
Kathi Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (at right) released a blog post on the USPTO's Director's Blog on Monday addressing the fraught subject...more
Almost four years ago, in a relatively rare occurrence based on there being an insufficient factual record to permit proper appellate review, the Federal Circuit vacated a District Court decision rendering invalid the claims...more
Captioned disarmingly as a Notice of Related Proceedings under 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a)(1) and ¶ 8.2 of the Standing Order, Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier...more
On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party),...more
On December 3rd, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Preliminary Motion No. 1 that asked the Board to deny the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) benefit of its U.S. Provisional Application...more
Pursuant to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Order issued November 29, 2021, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") on December 17,...more
On November 19th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 4* in Interference No. 106,132,...more
On November 19th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,132...more
On November 19th, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in CRISPR Interference No. 106,132, asking the Board to substitute the Count pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 41.121(a)(1)(iii) and...more
On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party),...more
One of the casualties of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act in 2012 was 35 U.S.C. § 145, which had provided recourse to U.S. District Courts for U.S. patent applicants disgruntled with a determination of unpatentability...more
On February 18th, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Opposition to Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 from the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively,...more
On February 18th, Sigma-Aldrich filed its Opposition to Junior Party's (the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier; collectively, "CVC") Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1...more
On December 3rd, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 2 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) as Junior Party),...more
On December 3rd, Senior Party Sigma-Aldrich filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 1 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) as Junior Party),...more