The Federal Circuit handed down an opinion last week that invalidated several asserted claims and found infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2) of the claims, while refusing to modify its judgment on infringement after...more
Last week the Federal Circuit handed down a pair of non-precedential decisions affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. This post concerns the decision in Medtronic, Inc....more
Last week, the Federal Circuit handed down its opinion in Pfizer Inc. v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) determination that all claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 challenged in...more
In view of the unprecedented uncertainty in patent law generated by counter-doctrinal Supreme Court decisions over the past decade or so and a cowed Federal Circuit relegated to complaining that their hands are tied on most...more
In those (in retrospect) halcyon days more than a decade ago (before Mayo, Myriad, Alice, and the subject matter eligibility quagmire arose), perhaps the most significant Supreme Court decision was KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex...more
In its appeal from an adverse decision on priority by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in Interference No. 106,115 (directed to CRISPR-mediated gene editing), Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the...more
"Hope springs eternal [in the human breast]" (Alexander Pope) and "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" (the latter attributed variably to Albert Einstein and Werner Erhart) are two...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 Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) Final Written Decision (FWD) in an inter partes review (IPR) that Mylan Pharmaceuticals failed to show the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,326,708 were...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
Last month in Cornell Research Foundation, Inc. v. Vidal, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's determinations in six inter partes review proceedings that invalidated the challenged claims for being...more
On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party),...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. 3 in Interference No. 106,132...more
In a crowded pharmaceutical art, the deficiencies thereof being so patent that the FDA encouraged industry to address and correct them, concerning a formulation developed to address the opioid crisis raging earlier in this...more
On December 3rd, Junior Party the Broad Institute, Harvard University, and MIT (collectively, Broad) filed its Contingent Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,133 (which names Sigma-Aldrich as Senior Party),...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. 3 in Interference No. 106,132...more
On January 6, 2022, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced a new program with the goal of increasing examiner efficiency. The Deferred Subject Matter Eligibility Response (DSMER) Pilot Program will launch on February...more
When does the absence of evidence turn into evidence of absence, and when does such absence amount to an adequate written description of the absence of a step of a method claim? This is a question that comes readily to mind...more
There are some cases where the Federal Circuit makes its decision based on the eternal verities of patent law (insofar as there are any eternal verities in patent law). One such decision arose earlier this month when the...more
In its turn, on September 17th, Senior Party ToolGen Inc. filed its Motion to Exclude certain evidence presented by Junior Party the University of California/Berkeley, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier...more
11/22/2021
/ CRISPR ,
Hearsay ,
Hearsay Exceptions ,
Inadmissible Evidence ,
Interference Claims ,
Life Sciences ,
Motion to Exclude ,
Objections ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Rule of Evidence 702
Joint inventorship has been called "one of the muddiest concepts in the muddy metaphysics of patent law" because the "exact parameters of what constitutes joint inventorship are quite difficult to define." Mueller Brass Co....more
11/18/2021
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
America Invents Act ,
Joint Inventors ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent-in-Suit ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Prior Art
The Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1970 (2021), at the end of its last term resulted in many cases with pending certiorari petitions that were based on Appointment Clause challenges to...more
On May 20th, Junior Party the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Vienna; and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, "CVC") filed its Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 in Interference No. 106,127 (which...more
Imposition of liability under the equitable doctrine of inequitable conduct (as it has been variously defined) can result in a patent being held unenforceable; for this reason, former Chief Judge Rader called it the "atomic...more
In a nonprecedential decision, the Federal Circuit gave a mixture of success and failure to the parties in four separate inter partes review decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, in C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Medline...more